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
Comparative Study
. 2025 Mar 3;8(3):e251705.
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.1705.

Patient Complexity and Bile Duct Injury After Robotic-Assisted vs Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Cody Lendon Mullens  1   2   3 , Sarah Sheskey  2 , Jyothi R Thumma  2 , Justin B Dimick  1   2 , Edward C Norton  2   4   5 , Kyle H Sheetz  1   2
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Patient Complexity and Bile Duct Injury After Robotic-Assisted vs Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Cody Lendon Mullens et al. JAMA Netw Open. .

Abstract

Importance: Recent evidence suggests higher bile duct injury rates for patients undergoing robotic-assisted cholecystectomy compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Proponents of the robotic-assisted approach contend that this may be due to selection of higher-risk and more complex patients being offered robotic-assisted cholecystectomy.

Objective: To evaluate the comparative safety of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy among patients with varying levels of risk for adverse postoperative outcomes.

Design, setting, and participants: This retrospective cohort study assessed fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries aged 66 to 99 years who underwent cholecystectomy between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2021. Data analysis was performed between June and August 2024. Medicare beneficiaries were separated into model training and experimental cohorts (60% and 40%, respectively). Random forest modeling and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator techniques were then used in a risk model training cohort to stratify beneficiaries based on their risk of a composite outcome of postoperative adverse events consisting of 90-day postoperative complications, serious complications, reoperations, and rehospitalization in an independent experimental cohort.

Exposures: Robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome of interest was bile duct injury requiring operative intervention after cholecystectomy. Secondary outcomes were composite outcomes from cholecystectomy composed of any complications, serious complications, reoperations, and readmissions.

Results: A total of 737 908 individuals (mean [SD] age, 74.7 [9.9] years; 387 563 [52.5%] female) were included, with 295 807 in an experimental cohort and 442 101 in a training cohort. Bile duct injury was higher among patients undergoing robotic-assisted compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy in each subgroup (low-risk group: relative risk [RR], 3.14; 95% CI, 2.35-3.94; medium-risk group: RR, 3.13; 95% CI, 2.35-3.92; and high-risk group: RR, 3.11; 95% CI, 2.34-3.88). Overall, composite outcomes between the 2 groups were similar for robotic-assisted cholecystectomy compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (RR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.07-1.12), aside from reoperation, which was overall higher in the robotic-assisted group compared with the laparoscopic group (RR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.35-1.59).

Conclusions and relevance: In this cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries, bile duct injury rates were higher among low-, medium-, and high-risk surgical candidates after robotic-assisted cholecystectomy. These findings suggest that patient selection may not be the cause of differences in bile duct injury rates among patients undergoing robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Dimick reported having equity in ArborMetrix Inc outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure.
Figure.. Differences in Bile Duct Injury After Cholecystectomy Within Our Experimental Cohort Among Medicare Beneficiaries, Stratified by Operative Approach and Patient Risk Tercile
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Kalata S, Thumma JR, Norton EC, Dimick JB, Sheetz KH. Comparative safety of robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy. JAMA Surg. 2023;158(12):1303-1310. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2023.4389 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Barrett M, Asbun HJ, Chien HL, Brunt LM, Telem DA. Bile duct injury and morbidity following cholecystectomy: a need for improvement. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(4):1683-1688. doi:10.1007/s00464-017-5847-8 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Savader SJ, Lillemoe KD, Prescott CA, et al. . Laparoscopic cholecystectomy-related bile duct injuries: a health and financial disaster. Ann Surg. 1997;225(3):268-273. doi:10.1097/00000658-199703000-00005 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. MacFadyen BV Jr, Vecchio R, Ricardo AE, Mathis CR. Bile duct injury after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the United States experience. Surg Endosc. 1998;12(4):315-321. doi:10.1007/s004649900661 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sheetz KH, Thumma JR, Kalata S, Norton EC, Dimick JB. Learning curve for robotic-assisted cholecystectomy. JAMA Surg. 2024;159(7):833-836. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2024.1221 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms