Literature DB >> 35157123

Outcomes following robot-assisted versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: the New York State experience.

Matthew D Burstein1, Ajay A Myneni1, Lorin M Towle-Miller2, Iman Simmonds1, Justin Gray3, Steven D Schwaitzberg1, Katia Noyes1,3, Aaron B Hoffman4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) represents more than half of all bariatric procedures in the USA, and robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy (RSG) is becoming increasingly common. There is a paucity of evidence regarding postoperative surgical outcomes (> 30 days) in RSG patients, especially as these patients move between multiple hospital systems.
METHODS: Using 2012-2018 New York State's inpatient and ambulatory data from the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System, bivariate and multivariate analyses were employed to examine patient long-term outcomes, postoperative complications, and charges following RSG versus LSG in unmatched and propensity score-matched (PSM) samples.
RESULTS: Among the 72,157 minimally invasive sleeve gastrectomies identified, 2365 (2.6%) were RSGs. In the PSM sample (2365 RSG matched to 23,650 LSG), RSG cases were more likely to be converted to an open procedure (2.3% vs 0.2% LSG patients, p < 0.01) and had a longer mean length of stay (LOS; 2.1 vs. 1.8 days LSG, p < 0.01). Postoperative complications were not different between RSG and LSG patients, but the proportion of emergency room visits resulting in inpatient readmissions was higher among RSG patients (5.5% vs. 4.2% in LSG patients, p < .01). Among the super obese (body mass index ≥ 50) patients, conversions to open procedure and LOS were also significantly higher for RSG versus LSG cases. Average hospital charges for the index admission ($47,623 RSG vs $35,934 LSG) and cumulative changes for 1 year from the date of surgery ($57,484 RSG vs $43,769 LSG) were > 30% higher for RSG patients.
CONCLUSIONS: RSG patients were more likely to have conversions to open procedures, longer postoperative stay, readmissions, and higher charges for both the index admission and beyond, compared to LSG patients. No clear advantages emerged for the utilization of the robotic platform for either average risk or extremely obese patients.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bariatric; Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy; New York State; Outcomes; Robotic sleeve gastrectomy; SPARCS

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35157123     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09026-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   3.453


  2 in total

Review 1.  Robotic bariatric surgery: A general review of the current status.

Authors:  Minoa K Jung; Monika E Hagen; Nicolas C Buchs; Leo H Buehler; Philippe Morel
Journal:  Int J Med Robot       Date:  2017-05-23       Impact factor: 2.547

2.  Robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy in morbidly obese versus super obese patients.

Authors:  Parveen Bhatia; Vivek Bindal; Rahul Singh; Raquel Gonzalez-Heredia; Sudhir Kalhan; Mukund Khetan; Suviraj John
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2014 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.172

  2 in total
  1 in total

1.  Comparison of robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy outcomes in multiple staple line treatment modalities from 2015 to 2019: a 5-year propensity score-adjusted MBSAQIP® analysis.

Authors:  William C Bennett; Jihye Park; Murphy Mostellar; Ian C Garbarine; Manuel E Sanchez-Casalongue; Timothy M Farrell; Randal Zhou
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-06-14       Impact factor: 4.584

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.