Lundberg PW, Wolfe S, Seaone J, Stoltzfus J, Claros L, El Chaar M. Robotic gastric bypass is getting better: first results from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program.
Surg Obes Relat Dis 2018;
14:1240-1245. [PMID:
30580769 DOI:
10.1016/j.soard.2018.05.022]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/14/2018] [Revised: 04/30/2018] [Accepted: 05/26/2018] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
The use of robotic platforms in performing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) is increasing, though their safety compared with the conventional laparoscopic approach remains unclear.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to evaluate perioperative data and 30-day outcomes of conventional and robot-assisted LRYGB using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program data registry.
SETTING
University health network, United States.
METHODS
We reviewed all conventional and robot-assisted LRYGB cases entered between January 1 and December 31, 2016 in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program data registry. Demographic characteristics and 30-day outcomes were analyzed based on separate Mann-Whitney rank sums tests, χ2, or Fisher's exact tests as appropriate, with P ≤ .05 denoting statistical significance with no adjustment for multiple testing.
RESULTS
Of the 39,425 patients who underwent LRYGB, 2822 were robot-assisted. The robot-assisted approach required significantly more time (138 versus 108 min, P < .0001). Rates of organ space infection, bleeding, and other significant adverse events after the conventional and robot-assisted approaches were .3% versus .5% (P = .13), 1.1% versus .8% (P = .11), and 2.3% versus 2.3% (P = .96), respectively. There were also no significant differences in the rates of mortality, length of stay, reoperation, or readmission between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Robot-assisted LRYGB is an increasingly popular alternative to the conventional laparoscopic approach. According to the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database, the early safety of these 2 techniques is equal, although the robotic approach requires more operative time.
Collapse