Talar Tatarian1, Jie Yang2, Junying Wang3, Salvatore Docimo4, Mark Talamini4, Aurora D Pryor4, Konstantinos Spaniolas4. 1. Division of Bariatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, Thomas Jefferson University, 211 S 9th Street, Suite 402, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA. talar.tatarian@jefferson.edu. 2. Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Department of Family, Population and Preventive Medicine, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA. 3. Department of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA. 4. Division of Bariatric, Foregut, and Advanced Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA.
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.
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.
Entities:
Keywords:
MBSAQIP; Outcome trends; Robotic bariatric surgery
Authors: Erman O Akpinar; Perla J Marang-van de Mheen; Simon W Nienhuijs; Jan Willem M Greve; Ronald S L Liem Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2021-03-30 Impact factor: 4.129