Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 3/2019

01-03-2019 | 2018 SAGES Oral

Robotic versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a MBSAQIP analysis

Authors: Reza Fazl Alizadeh, Shiri Li, Colette S. Inaba, Andreea I. Dinicu, Marcelo W. Hinojosa, Brian R. Smith, Michael J. Stamos, Ninh T. Nguyen

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 3/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy has become the procedure of choice for the treatment of morbid obesity. Robotic sleeve gastrectomy is an alternative surgical option, but its utilization has been low. The aim of this study was to evaluate the contemporary outcomes of robotic sleeve gastrectomy (RSG) versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) using a national database from accredited bariatric centers.

Study design

Using the 2015 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database, clinical data for patients who underwent RSG or LSG were examined. Emergent and revisional cases were excluded. A multivariate logistic regression model was utilized to compare the outcomes between RSG and LSG.

Results

A total of 75,079 patients underwent sleeve gastrectomy with 70,298 (93.6%) LSG and 4781 (6.4%) RSG. Preoperative sleep apnea and hypoalbumenia were significantly higher in the RSG group (P < 0.01). Mean length of stay was similar between RSG and LSG (1.8 ± 2.0 vs. 1.7 ± 2.0 days, P = 0.17). Operative time was longer in the RSG group (102 ± 43 vs. 74 ± 36 min, P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality between the RSG versus LSG group (0.02% vs. 0.01%, AOR 0.85; 95% CI 0.11–6.46, P = 0.88). However, RSG was associated with higher serious morbidity (1.1% vs. 0.8%, AOR 1.40; 95% CI 1.05–1.86, P < 0.01), higher leak rate (1.5% vs. 0.5%, AOR 3.14; 95% CI 2.65–4.42, P < 0.01), and higher surgical site infection rate (0.7% vs. 0.4%, AOR 1.55; 95% CI 1.08–2.23, P = 0.01).

Conclusions

Robotic sleeve gastrectomy has longer operative time and is associated with higher postoperative morbidity including leak and surgical site infections. Laparoscopy should continue to be the surgical approach of choice for sleeve gastrectomy.
Literature
3.
go back to reference Young MT, Gebhart A, Phelan MJ, Nguyen NT (2015) Use and outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy vs laparoscopic gastric bypass: analysis of the American college of surgeons NSQIP. J Am Coll Surg 220:880–885CrossRefPubMed Young MT, Gebhart A, Phelan MJ, Nguyen NT (2015) Use and outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy vs laparoscopic gastric bypass: analysis of the American college of surgeons NSQIP. J Am Coll Surg 220:880–885CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Inaba CS, Koh CY, Sujatha-Bhaskar S, Silva JP, Chen Y, Nguyen DV, Nguyen NT (2018) One-year mortality after contemporary laparoscopic bariatric surgery: an analysis of the bariatric outcomes longitudinal database. J Am Coll Surg 226(6):1166–1174CrossRef Inaba CS, Koh CY, Sujatha-Bhaskar S, Silva JP, Chen Y, Nguyen DV, Nguyen NT (2018) One-year mortality after contemporary laparoscopic bariatric surgery: an analysis of the bariatric outcomes longitudinal database. J Am Coll Surg 226(6):1166–1174CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Benaiges D, Mas-Lorenzo A, Goday A, Ramon JM, Chillaron JJ, Pedro-Botet J, Flores-Le Roux JA (2015) Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: more than a restrictive bariatric surgery procedure? World J Gastroenterol 21:11804–11814CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Benaiges D, Mas-Lorenzo A, Goday A, Ramon JM, Chillaron JJ, Pedro-Botet J, Flores-Le Roux JA (2015) Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: more than a restrictive bariatric surgery procedure? World J Gastroenterol 21:11804–11814CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference Jung MK, Hagen ME, Buchs NC, Buehler LH, Morel P (2017) Robotic bariatric surgery: a general review of the current status. Int J Med Robot 13(4):e1834CrossRef Jung MK, Hagen ME, Buchs NC, Buehler LH, Morel P (2017) Robotic bariatric surgery: a general review of the current status. Int J Med Robot 13(4):e1834CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Ayloo SM, Addeo P, Buchs NC, Shah G, Giulianotti PC (2011) Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: is there a difference in outcomes? World J Surg 35:637–642CrossRefPubMed Ayloo SM, Addeo P, Buchs NC, Shah G, Giulianotti PC (2011) Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: is there a difference in outcomes? World J Surg 35:637–642CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Elli E, Gonzalez-Heredia R, Sarvepalli S, Masrur M (2015) Laparoscopic and robotic sleeve gastrectomy: short- and long-term results. Obes Surg 25:967–974CrossRefPubMed Elli E, Gonzalez-Heredia R, Sarvepalli S, Masrur M (2015) Laparoscopic and robotic sleeve gastrectomy: short- and long-term results. Obes Surg 25:967–974CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Moon RC, Stephenson D, Royall NA, Teixeira AF, Jawad MA (2016) Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: learning curve, perioperative, and short-term outcomes. Obes Surg 26:2463–2468CrossRefPubMed Moon RC, Stephenson D, Royall NA, Teixeira AF, Jawad MA (2016) Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: learning curve, perioperative, and short-term outcomes. Obes Surg 26:2463–2468CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Romero RJ, Kosanovic R, Rabaza JR, Seetharamaiah R, Donkor C, Gallas M, Gonzalez AM (2013) Robotic sleeve gastrectomy: experience of 134 cases and comparison with a systematic review of the laparoscopic approach. Obes Surg 23:1743–1752CrossRefPubMed Romero RJ, Kosanovic R, Rabaza JR, Seetharamaiah R, Donkor C, Gallas M, Gonzalez AM (2013) Robotic sleeve gastrectomy: experience of 134 cases and comparison with a systematic review of the laparoscopic approach. Obes Surg 23:1743–1752CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Vilallonga R, Fort JM, Caubet E, Gonzalez O, Armengol M (2013) Robotic sleeve gastrectomy versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a comparative study with 200 patients. Obes Surg 23:1501–1507CrossRefPubMed Vilallonga R, Fort JM, Caubet E, Gonzalez O, Armengol M (2013) Robotic sleeve gastrectomy versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a comparative study with 200 patients. Obes Surg 23:1501–1507CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Villamere J, Gebhart A, Vu S, Nguyen NT (2015) Utilization and outcome of laparoscopic versus robotic general and bariatric surgical procedures at Academic Medical Centers. Surg Endosc 29:1729–1736CrossRefPubMed Villamere J, Gebhart A, Vu S, Nguyen NT (2015) Utilization and outcome of laparoscopic versus robotic general and bariatric surgical procedures at Academic Medical Centers. Surg Endosc 29:1729–1736CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Altieri MS, Yang J, Telem DA, Chen H, Talamini M, Pryor A (2016) Robotic-assisted outcomes are not tied to surgeon volume and experience. Surg Endosc 30:2825–2833CrossRefPubMed Altieri MS, Yang J, Telem DA, Chen H, Talamini M, Pryor A (2016) Robotic-assisted outcomes are not tied to surgeon volume and experience. Surg Endosc 30:2825–2833CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Diamantis T, Alexandrou A, Nikiteas N, Giannopoulos A, Papalambros E (2011) Initial experience with robotic sleeve gastrectomy for morbid obesity. Obes Surg 21:1172–1179CrossRefPubMed Diamantis T, Alexandrou A, Nikiteas N, Giannopoulos A, Papalambros E (2011) Initial experience with robotic sleeve gastrectomy for morbid obesity. Obes Surg 21:1172–1179CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Ecker BL, Maduka R, Ramdon A, Dempsey DT, Dumon KR, Williams NN (2016) Resident education in robotic-assisted vertical sleeve gastrectomy: outcomes and cost-analysis of 411 consecutive cases. Surg Obes Relat Dis 12:313–320CrossRefPubMed Ecker BL, Maduka R, Ramdon A, Dempsey DT, Dumon KR, Williams NN (2016) Resident education in robotic-assisted vertical sleeve gastrectomy: outcomes and cost-analysis of 411 consecutive cases. Surg Obes Relat Dis 12:313–320CrossRefPubMed
17.
18.
go back to reference Schraibman V, Macedo AL, Epstein MG, Soares MY, Maccapani G, Matos D, Rizzo LV, Goldman SM (2014) Comparison of the morbidity, weight loss, and relative costs between robotic and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy for the treatment of obesity in Brazil. Obes Surg 24:1420–1424CrossRefPubMed Schraibman V, Macedo AL, Epstein MG, Soares MY, Maccapani G, Matos D, Rizzo LV, Goldman SM (2014) Comparison of the morbidity, weight loss, and relative costs between robotic and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy for the treatment of obesity in Brazil. Obes Surg 24:1420–1424CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Kannan U, Ecker BL, Choudhury R, Dempsey DT, Williams NN, Dumon KR (2016) Laparoscopic hand-assisted versus robotic-assisted laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: experience of 103 consecutive cases. Surg Obes Relat Dis 12:94–99CrossRefPubMed Kannan U, Ecker BL, Choudhury R, Dempsey DT, Williams NN, Dumon KR (2016) Laparoscopic hand-assisted versus robotic-assisted laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: experience of 103 consecutive cases. Surg Obes Relat Dis 12:94–99CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Magouliotis DE, Tasiopoulou VS, Sioka E, Zacharoulis D (2017) Robotic versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy for morbid obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Surg 27:245–253CrossRefPubMed Magouliotis DE, Tasiopoulou VS, Sioka E, Zacharoulis D (2017) Robotic versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy for morbid obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Surg 27:245–253CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Ayloo S, Buchs NC, Addeo P, Bianco FM, Giulianotti PC (2011) Robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy for super-morbidly obese patients. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 21:295–299CrossRefPubMed Ayloo S, Buchs NC, Addeo P, Bianco FM, Giulianotti PC (2011) Robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy for super-morbidly obese patients. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 21:295–299CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Robotic versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a MBSAQIP analysis
Authors
Reza Fazl Alizadeh
Shiri Li
Colette S. Inaba
Andreea I. Dinicu
Marcelo W. Hinojosa
Brian R. Smith
Michael J. Stamos
Ninh T. Nguyen
Publication date
01-03-2019
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 3/2019
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6387-6

Other articles of this Issue 3/2019

Surgical Endoscopy 3/2019 Go to the issue