Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 7/2021

01-07-2021 | Heart Surgery | 2020 SAGES Oral

Trends in the utilization and perioperative outcomes of primary robotic bariatric surgery from 2015 to 2018: a study of 46,764 patients from the MBSAQIP data registry

Authors: Talar Tatarian, Jie Yang, Junying Wang, Salvatore Docimo, Mark Talamini, Aurora D. Pryor, Konstantinos Spaniolas

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 7/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Utilization of robotic surgery has increased over time. Outcomes in bariatric surgery have been variable. This study used the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation Quality and Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) dataset to compare nationwide trends in utilization and outcomes improvement for robotic and laparoscopic bariatric surgery over a four-year period.

Methods

We identified all adult patients who underwent robotic or laparoscopic primary sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) from 2015 to 2018. Those with previous bariatric/foregut surgery or open conversion were excluded. Trends in clinical outcomes of different surgery types over years were compared through multivariable regression models. Subgroup analysis was performed for patients in 2018, comparing outcomes among different surgery types.

Results

A total of 571,417 patients underwent bariatric surgery, of which 46,764 (8.2%) were performed robotically. Utilization of the robotic platform increased annually, from 6.7% in 2015 to 10.3% in 2018 (p < 0.0001). The majority of patients underwent SG (n = 33,891, 72.5%). Perioperative outcomes improved over time for both robotic and laparoscopic procedures. Improvement was more pronounced in the robotic cohort for extended length of stay (OR 0.76 vs 0.8, p < 0.0001) and operative time (OR 0.98 vs 0.99, p < 0.0001). In the 2018 subgroup, multivariable analysis found laparoscopic RYGB was associated with increased bleeding (OR 2.220, p = 0.0004), overall complications (OR 1.356, p = 0.0013), and extended LOS (OR 1.178, p < 0.0001) compared to robotic surgery. Laparoscopic SG was associated with decreased anastomotic/staple line leak (OR 0.718, p = 0.0321), 30-d readmission (OR 0.826, p = 0.0005), 30-d reintervention (OR 0.723, p = 0.0014), overall event (OR 0.862, p = 0.0009), and extended LOS (OR 0.950, p = 0.0113). Across the board, laparoscopic surgery was associated with decreased operative time (Adjusted Ratio = 0.704, p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

Robotic utilization for bariatric surgery is increasing and outcomes continue to improve with time. There is a differential impact of the robotic approach on SG and RYGB, which requires further assessment.
Literature
2.
go back to reference Li K, Zou J, Tang J, Di J, Han X, Zhang P (2016) Robotic versus laparoscopic bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Surg 26:3031–3044CrossRef Li K, Zou J, Tang J, Di J, Han X, Zhang P (2016) Robotic versus laparoscopic bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Surg 26:3031–3044CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Tieu K, Allison N, Snyder B, Wilson T, Toder M, Wilson E (2013) Robotic-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: update from 2 high-volume centers. Surg Obes Relat Dis 9(2):284–288CrossRef Tieu K, Allison N, Snyder B, Wilson T, Toder M, Wilson E (2013) Robotic-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: update from 2 high-volume centers. Surg Obes Relat Dis 9(2):284–288CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Celio AC, Kasten KR, Schwoerer S, Pories WJ, Spaniolas K (2017) Perioperative safety of laparoscopic versus robotic gastric bypass: a propensity matched analysis of early experience. Surg Obes Relat Dis 13:1847–1852CrossRef Celio AC, Kasten KR, Schwoerer S, Pories WJ, Spaniolas K (2017) Perioperative safety of laparoscopic versus robotic gastric bypass: a propensity matched analysis of early experience. Surg Obes Relat Dis 13:1847–1852CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Lundberg PW, Wolfe S, Seaone J, Stoltzfus J, Claros L, El Chaar M (2018) Robotic gastric bypass is getting better: first results from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program. Surg Obes Relat Dis 14:1240–1245CrossRef Lundberg PW, Wolfe S, Seaone J, Stoltzfus J, Claros L, El Chaar M (2018) Robotic gastric bypass is getting better: first results from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program. Surg Obes Relat Dis 14:1240–1245CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Alizadeh RF, Li S, Inaba CS, Dinicu AI, Hinojosa MW, Smith BR, Stamos MJ, Nguyen N (2019) Robotic versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a MBSAQIP analysis. Surg Endosc 33:917–922CrossRef Alizadeh RF, Li S, Inaba CS, Dinicu AI, Hinojosa MW, Smith BR, Stamos MJ, Nguyen N (2019) Robotic versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a MBSAQIP analysis. Surg Endosc 33:917–922CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Papasavas P, Seip RL, Stone A, Staff I, McLaughlin T, Tishler D (2019) Robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy and roux-en-y gastric bypass: results from the metabolic and bariatric surgery accreditation and quality improvement program data registry. Surg Obes Relat Dis 15:1281–1290CrossRef Papasavas P, Seip RL, Stone A, Staff I, McLaughlin T, Tishler D (2019) Robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy and roux-en-y gastric bypass: results from the metabolic and bariatric surgery accreditation and quality improvement program data registry. Surg Obes Relat Dis 15:1281–1290CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Acevedo E, Mazzei M, Zhao H, Lu X, Soans R, Edwards MA (2020) Outcomes in conventional laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted primary bariatric surgery: a retrospective, case-controlled study of the MBSAQIP database. Surg Endosc 34:1353–1365CrossRef Acevedo E, Mazzei M, Zhao H, Lu X, Soans R, Edwards MA (2020) Outcomes in conventional laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted primary bariatric surgery: a retrospective, case-controlled study of the MBSAQIP database. Surg Endosc 34:1353–1365CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Nasser H, Ivanics T, Ranjal RS, Leonard-Murali S, Genaw J (2020) Perioperative outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy in the superobese. J Surg Res 249:34–41CrossRef Nasser H, Ivanics T, Ranjal RS, Leonard-Murali S, Genaw J (2020) Perioperative outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy in the superobese. J Surg Res 249:34–41CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Pastrana M, Stoltzfus J, Claros L, El Chaar M (2020) Outcomes of robotic bariatric surgery in super-obese patients: first report based on MBSAQIP database. Surg Obes Relat Dis 16:71–79CrossRef Pastrana M, Stoltzfus J, Claros L, El Chaar M (2020) Outcomes of robotic bariatric surgery in super-obese patients: first report based on MBSAQIP database. Surg Obes Relat Dis 16:71–79CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Goldberg I, Yang J, Nie L, Bates AT, Docimo S, Pryor AD, Cohn T, Spaniolas K (2019) Safety of bariatric surgery in patients older than 65 years. Surg Obes Relat Dis 15(8):1380–1387CrossRef Goldberg I, Yang J, Nie L, Bates AT, Docimo S, Pryor AD, Cohn T, Spaniolas K (2019) Safety of bariatric surgery in patients older than 65 years. Surg Obes Relat Dis 15(8):1380–1387CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Trends in the utilization and perioperative outcomes of primary robotic bariatric surgery from 2015 to 2018: a study of 46,764 patients from the MBSAQIP data registry
Authors
Talar Tatarian
Jie Yang
Junying Wang
Salvatore Docimo
Mark Talamini
Aurora D. Pryor
Konstantinos Spaniolas
Publication date
01-07-2021
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 7/2021
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-07839-3

Other articles of this Issue 7/2021

Surgical Endoscopy 7/2021 Go to the issue