Costs of robotic and laparoscopic bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Background: Bariatric surgery is currently the most effective approach to addressing severe obesity and reducing related health issues. Laparoscopy remains the standard technique, whereas robotic-assisted surgery is increasingly adopted, although its role in bariatric surgery remains debated. The main criticism concerns its higher costs and the lack of evidence demonstrating improved clinical outcomes compared to other treatment methods. We aimed to compare the costs of robotic-assisted and laparoscopic bariatric surgery through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods: Following PRISMA reporting guidelines, a literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for studies comparing robotic-assisted and laparoscopic bariatric surgery. The primary outcome was total hospital costs, with bias assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. Effect sizes were calculated with 95% confidence intervals, and an overall effect was estimated using a random-effects model.

Results: A total of 14 retrospective studies (293 articles screened) were included, with 1,414,357 patients (112,363 robotic; 1,301,994 laparoscopic). Total hospital costs favored laparoscopic surgery (SMD 0.721, 95%CI: 0.555-0.887, p < 0.001, absolute difference USD 3819). Operating room costs also favored laparoscopy (SMD 1.339, 95%CI 0.202-2.476, p = 0.021, absolute difference: USD 9746). Laparoscopy was associated with shorter operative time, while robotic surgery showed a slight advantage in hospital stay and complication rates. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were consistent with the main findings. The quality of evidence was rated as low due to potential biases.

Conclusions: Our systematic review and meta-analysis provides the most current and robust evidence indicating that the robotic-assisted approach incurs significantly higher costs than the laparoscopic approach in bariatric surgery. This finding remained consistent across the overall analysis as well as in nearly all subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to accurately evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the robotic approach in both primary and revisional bariatric procedures.

Keywords: Bariatric surgery; Cost–benefit analysis; Health care costs; Robotic surgical procedures.