Cargando…
Outcomes in conventional laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted primary bariatric surgery: a retrospective, case–controlled study of the MBSAQIP database
INTRODUCTION: Robotic-assisted bariatric surgery is increasingly performed. There remains controversy about the overall benefit of robotic-assisted (RBS) compared to conventional laparoscopic (LBS) bariatric surgery. In this study, we used a large national risk-stratified bariatric clinical database...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7222911/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31209608 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06915-7 |
_version_ | 1783533674039345152 |
---|---|
author | Acevedo, Edwin Mazzei, Michael Zhao, Huaqing Lu, Xiaoning Soans, Rohit Edwards, Michael A. |
author_facet | Acevedo, Edwin Mazzei, Michael Zhao, Huaqing Lu, Xiaoning Soans, Rohit Edwards, Michael A. |
author_sort | Acevedo, Edwin |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Robotic-assisted bariatric surgery is increasingly performed. There remains controversy about the overall benefit of robotic-assisted (RBS) compared to conventional laparoscopic (LBS) bariatric surgery. In this study, we used a large national risk-stratified bariatric clinical database to compare outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic gastric bypass (RNYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the 2015 and 2016 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) Participant Use Data File (PUF) was performed. Primary robotic and laparoscopic RYNGB and SG were analyzed. Descriptive analysis was performed of the unmatched cohorts, followed by 1:3 case-controlled matching. Cases and controls were matched by patient demographics and pre-operative comorbidities, and peri-operative outcomes compared. RESULTS: 77,991 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RnYGB) (7.5% robotic-assisted) and 189,503 SG (6.8% robotic-assisted) cases were identified. Operative length was significantly higher in both the robotic-assisted RnYGB and SG cohorts (p < 0.0001). Outcomes were similar between the robotic-assisted and laparoscopic RnYGB cohorts, except a lower mortality rate (p = 0.05), transfusion requirement (p = 0.005), aggregate bleeding (p = 0.04), and surgical site infections (SSI) (p = 0.006) in the robotic-assisted cohort. Outcomes were also similar between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic SG, except for a longer length of stay (p < 0.0001) and higher rates of conversion (p < 0.0001), 30-day intervention (p = 0.01), operative drain present (p < 0.0001), sepsis (p = 0.01), and organ space SSI (p = 0.0002) in the robotic cohort. Bleeding was lower in the robotic SG cohort and mortality was similar. CONCLUSION: Both robotic-assisted and laparoscopic RnYGB and SG are overall very safe. Robotic-assisted gastric bypass is associated with a lower mortality and morbidity; however, a clear benefit for robotic-assisted SG compared to laparoscopic SG was not seen. Given the longer operative and hospital duration, robotic SG is not cost-effective. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-019-06915-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7222911 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72229112020-05-15 Outcomes in conventional laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted primary bariatric surgery: a retrospective, case–controlled study of the MBSAQIP database Acevedo, Edwin Mazzei, Michael Zhao, Huaqing Lu, Xiaoning Soans, Rohit Edwards, Michael A. Surg Endosc Article INTRODUCTION: Robotic-assisted bariatric surgery is increasingly performed. There remains controversy about the overall benefit of robotic-assisted (RBS) compared to conventional laparoscopic (LBS) bariatric surgery. In this study, we used a large national risk-stratified bariatric clinical database to compare outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic gastric bypass (RNYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the 2015 and 2016 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) Participant Use Data File (PUF) was performed. Primary robotic and laparoscopic RYNGB and SG were analyzed. Descriptive analysis was performed of the unmatched cohorts, followed by 1:3 case-controlled matching. Cases and controls were matched by patient demographics and pre-operative comorbidities, and peri-operative outcomes compared. RESULTS: 77,991 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RnYGB) (7.5% robotic-assisted) and 189,503 SG (6.8% robotic-assisted) cases were identified. Operative length was significantly higher in both the robotic-assisted RnYGB and SG cohorts (p < 0.0001). Outcomes were similar between the robotic-assisted and laparoscopic RnYGB cohorts, except a lower mortality rate (p = 0.05), transfusion requirement (p = 0.005), aggregate bleeding (p = 0.04), and surgical site infections (SSI) (p = 0.006) in the robotic-assisted cohort. Outcomes were also similar between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic SG, except for a longer length of stay (p < 0.0001) and higher rates of conversion (p < 0.0001), 30-day intervention (p = 0.01), operative drain present (p < 0.0001), sepsis (p = 0.01), and organ space SSI (p = 0.0002) in the robotic cohort. Bleeding was lower in the robotic SG cohort and mortality was similar. CONCLUSION: Both robotic-assisted and laparoscopic RnYGB and SG are overall very safe. Robotic-assisted gastric bypass is associated with a lower mortality and morbidity; however, a clear benefit for robotic-assisted SG compared to laparoscopic SG was not seen. Given the longer operative and hospital duration, robotic SG is not cost-effective. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-019-06915-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer US 2019-06-17 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7222911/ /pubmed/31209608 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06915-7 Text en © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019 This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic. |
spellingShingle | Article Acevedo, Edwin Mazzei, Michael Zhao, Huaqing Lu, Xiaoning Soans, Rohit Edwards, Michael A. Outcomes in conventional laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted primary bariatric surgery: a retrospective, case–controlled study of the MBSAQIP database |
title | Outcomes in conventional laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted primary bariatric surgery: a retrospective, case–controlled study of the MBSAQIP database |
title_full | Outcomes in conventional laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted primary bariatric surgery: a retrospective, case–controlled study of the MBSAQIP database |
title_fullStr | Outcomes in conventional laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted primary bariatric surgery: a retrospective, case–controlled study of the MBSAQIP database |
title_full_unstemmed | Outcomes in conventional laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted primary bariatric surgery: a retrospective, case–controlled study of the MBSAQIP database |
title_short | Outcomes in conventional laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted primary bariatric surgery: a retrospective, case–controlled study of the MBSAQIP database |
title_sort | outcomes in conventional laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted primary bariatric surgery: a retrospective, case–controlled study of the mbsaqip database |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7222911/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31209608 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06915-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT acevedoedwin outcomesinconventionallaparoscopicversusroboticassistedprimarybariatricsurgeryaretrospectivecasecontrolledstudyofthembsaqipdatabase AT mazzeimichael outcomesinconventionallaparoscopicversusroboticassistedprimarybariatricsurgeryaretrospectivecasecontrolledstudyofthembsaqipdatabase AT zhaohuaqing outcomesinconventionallaparoscopicversusroboticassistedprimarybariatricsurgeryaretrospectivecasecontrolledstudyofthembsaqipdatabase AT luxiaoning outcomesinconventionallaparoscopicversusroboticassistedprimarybariatricsurgeryaretrospectivecasecontrolledstudyofthembsaqipdatabase AT soansrohit outcomesinconventionallaparoscopicversusroboticassistedprimarybariatricsurgeryaretrospectivecasecontrolledstudyofthembsaqipdatabase AT edwardsmichaela outcomesinconventionallaparoscopicversusroboticassistedprimarybariatricsurgeryaretrospectivecasecontrolledstudyofthembsaqipdatabase |