Does Robotic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Provide Outcome Advantages over Standard Laparoscopic Approaches?

• Published in: Obesity surgery Vol. 28; no. 9; pp. 2589 - 2596
• Main Authors: Rogula, Tomasz, Koprivanac, Marijan, Janik, Michał Robert, Petrosky, Jacob A., Nowacki, Amy S., Dombrowska, Agnieszka, Kroh, Matthew, Brethauer, Stacy, Aminian, Ali, Schauer, Philip
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New York Springer US 01.09.2018; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Comparative studies; Gastrointestinal surgery; Laparoscopy; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Obesity; Original Contributions; Robotic surgery; Surgery; Surgical outcomes; Surgical outcomes; Roux-en-Y gastric bypass; Complications; Robotic; Bariatric surgery; Gastric bypass; Morbid obesity; Robot assisted; Anastomotic leak
• ISSN: 0960-8923; 1708-0428
• DOI: 10.1007/s11695-018-3228-6

Objective The aim was to compare clinical outcomes of patients treated with totally robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (TRRYGB) with those treated with the different laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) techniques. Summary Background Data The clinical benefit of the robotic approach to bariatric surgery compared to the standard laparoscopic approach is unclear. There are no studies directly comparing outcomes of TRRYGB with different LRYGB techniques. Methods Outcomes of 578 obese patients who underwent RYGB between 2011 and 2014 at an academic center were assessed. Multivariable analysis and propensity matching were used for comparing TRRYGB to different LRYGB techniques, including 21-mm EEA circular-stapled gastrojejunal anastomosis (GJA, LRYGB-21CS), linear-stapled GJA (LRYGB-LS), and hand-sewn GJA (LRYGB-HS). Results The TRRYGB technique required a longer mean operative time compared to the other groups, respectively 204 ± 46 vs. 139 ± 30 min (LRYGB-21CS), 206 ± 37 vs. 158 ± 30 min (LRYGB-LS), and 210 ± 36 vs. 167 ± 30 min (LRYGB-HS). TRRYGB experienced a lower stricture rate (2 vs. 17%, P  = 0.003), shorter hospital stay (2.6 ± 1.2 vs. 4.3 ± 5.5 days, P  = 0.008), and lower readmission rate (12 vs. 28%, P  = 0.009). No significant differences in outcomes were observed when comparing RRYGB to LRYGB-LS or LRYGB-HS. Conclusions TRRYGB increases operative time compared to all LRYGB techniques. TRRYGB was superior to LRYGB-21CS in terms of significantly shorter hospital stay, lower readmission rate, and less frequent GJA stricture formation. TRRYGB provides no clinical advantages over the LRYGB-LS and LRYGB-HS techniques.