Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Oct 1;278(4):489-496.
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005969. Epub 2023 Jun 30.

Impact of Robotic Assistance on Complications in Bariatric Surgery at Expert Laparoscopic Surgery Centers: A Retrospective Comparative Study With Propensity Score

Affiliations

Impact of Robotic Assistance on Complications in Bariatric Surgery at Expert Laparoscopic Surgery Centers: A Retrospective Comparative Study With Propensity Score

Robert Caiazzo et al. Ann Surg. .

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the way robotic assistance affected rate of complications in bariatric surgery at expert robotic and laparoscopic surgery facilities.

Background: While the benefits of robotic assistance were established at the beginning of surgical training, there is limited data on the robot's influence on experienced bariatric laparoscopic surgeons.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective study using the BRO clinical database (2008-2022) collecting data of patients operated on in expert centers. We compared the serious complication rate (defined as a Clavien score≥3) in patients undergoing metabolic bariatric surgery with or without robotic assistance. We used a directed acyclic graph to identify the variables adjustment set used in a multivariable linear regression, and a propensity score matching to calculate the average treatment effect (ATE) of robotic assistance.

Results: The study included 35,043 patients [24,428 sleeve gastrectomy (SG); 10,452 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB); 163 single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S)], with 938 operated on with robotic assistance (801 SG; 134 RYGB; 3 SADI-S), among 142 centers. Overall, we found no benefit of robotic assistance regarding the risk of complications (average treatment effect=-0.05, P =0.794), with no difference in the RYGB+SADI group ( P =0.322) but a negative trend in the SG group (more complications, P =0.060). Length of hospital stay was decreased in the robot group (3.7±11.1 vs 4.0±9.0 days, P <0.001).

Conclusions: Robotic assistance reduced the length of stay but did not statistically significantly reduce postoperative complications (Clavien score≥3) following either GBP or SG. A tendency toward an elevated risk of complications following SG requires more supporting studies.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

References

    1. Schauer PR, Bhatt DL, Kirwan JP, et al. Bariatric surgery versus intensive medical therapy for diabetes—5-year outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:641–651.
    1. Sjöström L. Review of the key results from the Swedish Obese Subjects (SOS) trial—a prospective controlled intervention study of bariatric surgery. J Intern Med. 2013;273:219–234.
    1. NIH Conference. Gastrointestinal surgery for severe obesity. Consensus Development Conference Panel. Ann Intern Med. 1991;115:956–961.
    1. Haute Autorité de Santé. Obésité: prise en charge chirurgicale chez l’adulte. Synthèse des recommandations de bonne pratique.
    1. Verkindt H, Pattou F, Caiazzo R. Patient care pathway before bariatric surgery. Rev Prat. 2022;72:157–159.