Advertisement

Outcomes of robotic bariatric surgery in super-obese patients: first report based on MBSAQIP database

Published:October 19, 2019DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2019.10.009

      Highlights

      • RYGB in SO patients has similar SAE, OSI for robotic or laparoscopic approach
      • SG in SO patients has more SAE, OSI for robotic than laparoscopic approach

      Abstract

      Background

      Bariatric surgery in the super-obese (SO) patient population represents a challenge. Although the robotic platform is increasingly used for these patients, there are limited data on outcomes compared with conventional laparoscopy.

      Objective

      Our study compared the safety and short-term outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic platforms for SO patients compared with morbidly obese patients based on the 2015 to 2017 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database.

      Setting

      University Hospital, United States.

      Methods

      We evaluated all primary robotic and laparoscopic cases and extracted 30-day outcomes in patients with body mass index <50 and ≤50 kg/m2. For our primary analysis, we used the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel method with surgery type Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) versus sleeve gastrectomy (SG) as the stratification variable to determine the association between body mass index categories and outcomes.

      Results

      A total of 355,278 patients were included in our analysis. For the robotic RYGB (R-RYGB) group (n = 6645) and R-SG (n = 15,984) there were 1674 SO patients (25.2%) and 3688 SO patients (23.1%), respectively.For the laparoscopic RYGB (LRYGB) group (n = 95,374) and LSG group (n = 237,275), there were 24,991 (26.2%) and 51,524 SO patients (21.7%), respectively. The incidence of serious adverse events in SO patients for R-RYGB and LRYGB groups was 7.6% versus 7.2% (P > .05) and 4% versus 3.5% (P > .05) for R-SG and L-SG, respectively. The incidence of organ space infection in SO patients for R-RYGB and LRYGB groups was .5% versus .4% (P > .05) and .4% versus .2% (P < .05) for R-SG and LSG, respectively.

      Conclusions

      Based on 2015 to 2017 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program data, we found no difference in outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic approaches in SO patients. There was a higher incidence of serious adverse events in SO patients compared with morbidly obese patients for both approaches.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Schauer P.R.
        • Bhatt D.L.
        • Kirwan J.P.
        • et al.
        for the STAMPEDE Investigators. Bariatric surgery versus intensive medical therapy for diabetes: 3-year outcomes.
        New Engl J Med. 2014; 370: 2002-2013
        • Parikh M.S.
        • Shen R.
        • Weiner M.
        • Siegel N.
        • Ren C.J.
        Laparoscopic bariatric surgery in super-obese patients (BMI > 50) is safe and effective: a review of 332 patients.
        Obes Surg. 2005; 15: 858-863
        • Dresel A.
        • Kuhn J.A.
        • McCarty T.M.
        Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in morbidly obese and super morbidly obese patients.
        Am J Surg. 2004; 187: 230-232
        • Hariri K.
        • Guevara D.
        • Dong M.
        • Kini S.U.
        • Herron D.M.
        • Fernandez-Ranvier G.
        Is bariatric surgery effective for comorbidity resolution in the super obese patients?.
        Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2018; 14: 1261-1268
        • Tekkis P.P.
        • Senagore A.J.
        • Delaney C.P.
        • Fazio V.W.
        Evaluation of the learning curve in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.
        Ann Surg. 2005; 242: 83-91
        • Lin S.
        • Jiang H.G.
        • Chen Z.H.
        • Zhou S.Y.
        • Liu X.S.
        • Yu J.R.
        Meta-analysis of robotic and laparoscopic surgery for treatment of rectal cancer.
        World J Gastroenterol. 2011; 17: 5214-5220
        • O’Neill M.
        • Moran P.S.
        • Teljeur C.
        • et al.
        Robot-assisted hysterectomy compared to open and laparoscopic approaches: systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013; 287: 907-918
        • Moser F.
        • Horgan S.
        Robotically assisted bariatric surgery.
        Am J Surg. 2004; 188: 38-44
        • Jacobsen G.
        • Berger R.
        • Horgan S.
        The role of robotic surgery in morbid obesity.
        J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2003; 13: 279-283
        • Bhatia P.
        • Bindal V.
        • Singh R.
        • et al.
        Robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy in morbidly obese versus super obese patients.
        JSLS. 2014; 18 (e2014.00099)
        • Ceccarelli G.
        • Patriti A.
        • Biancafarina A.
        • et al.
        Intraoperative and postoperative outcome of robot-assisted and traditional laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication.
        Eur Surg Res. 2009; 43: 198-203
        • Buchs N.C.
        • Azagury D.E.
        • Pugin F.
        • et al.
        Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for super obese patients: what approach?.
        Int J Medical Robotics Comput Assisted Surg. 2016; 12: 276-282
        • Benizri E.I.
        • Renaud M.
        • Reibel N.
        • et al.
        Perioperative outcomes after totally robotic gastric bypass: a prospective nonrandomized controlled study.
        Am J Surg. 2013; 206: 145-151
        • Moon R.C.
        • Gutierrez J.C.
        • Royall N.A.
        • Teixeira A.F.
        • Jawad M.A.
        Robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, is it safer than laparoscopic bypass?.
        Obes Surg. 2016; 26: 1016-1020
        • Celio A.C.
        • Kasten K.R.
        • Schwoerer A.
        • Pories W.J.
        • Spaniolas K.
        Perioperative safety of laparoscopic versus robotic gastric bypass: a propensity matched analysis of early experience.
        Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2017; 13: 1847-1852
        • Sebastian R.
        • Howell M.H.
        • Chang K.H.
        Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy: a propensity score-matched comparative analysis using the 2015–2016 MBSAQIP database.
        Surg Endosc. 2019; 33: 1600-1612
        • Sharma G.
        • Strong A.T.
        • Tu C.
        • Brethauer S.A.
        • Schauer P.R.
        • Aminian A.
        Robotic platform for gastric bypass is associated with more resource utilization: an analysis of MBSAQIP dataset.
        Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2018; 14: 304-310
        • Ayloo S.
        • Buchs N.C.
        • Addeo P.
        • Bianco F.M.
        • Giulianotti P.C.
        Robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy for super-morbidly obese patients.
        J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2011; 21: 295-299
        • Lundberg P.W.
        • Wolfe S.
        • Seaone J.
        • Stoltzfus J.
        • Claros L.
        • El Chaar M.
        Robotic gastric bypass is getting better: first results from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program.
        Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2018; 14: 1240-1245
        • Buchs N.C.
        • Pugin F.
        • Chassot G.
        • et al.
        Robot-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for super obese patients: a comparative study.
        Obes Surg. 2013; 23: 353-357
        • Kakarla V.R.
        • Nandipati K.
        • Lalla M.
        • Castro A.
        • Merola S.
        Are laparoscopic bariatric procedures safe in superobese (BMI ≥50 kg/m2) patients? An NSQIP data analysis.
        Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2011; 7: 452-458