Gaytán FOF, Gaytán FIA, Ayala VGA, Barajas GE, Guerrero CJ, Almazán HAI, Quiroz ROR

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 139-144
PDF size: 180.48 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Sleeve gastrectomy has gained popularity over the past decade due to its safety, feasibility, and good results. The purpose of this study is to describe our results, short term, with these procedures. Material and methods: This study is a nonrandomized, retrospective review of 36 patients who underwent a minimally invasive sleeve gastrectomy at the National Medical Center 20 de Noviembre from January 2015 to December 2018. A total of 18 patients underwent a laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, and another 18 patients underwent a robotic procedure using the da Vinci Surgical System^®. Patient demographics, comorbidities, date of surgery, postoperative morbidity and mortality, operating time, and length of stay were reviewed. Results: The mean age was 49.28 ± 7.62 (R-SL) versus 48.83 ± 6.8 (L-SG) with no statistical difference between the two groups. Patient's demographics were similar in both groups. The mean operative time for the robotic group was 79.11 ± 9.54 versus 75.05 ± 8.67 min in the laparoscopic group, with no statistical difference. There were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to the perioperative complications, length of stay. Conclusion: There is no significant difference between the robotic and laparoscopic group in terms of complications, length of stay, and estimated blood loss. Robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy is associated with longer operative time and increased cost.

REFERENCES

1. Andreas A, Adamantios M, Antonios A, Theofilos R, Christos T, Theodoros D. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy for morbid obesity with intra-operative endoscopy: Lessons we learned after 100 consecutive patients. Obes Surg. 2015; 25: 1223-1228. doi: 10.1007/s11695-014-1524-3.

2. Angrisani L, Santonicola A, Iovino P et al. Bariatric surgery and endoluminal procedures: IFSO worldwide survey 2014. Obes Surg. 2017; 27: 1-11. doi: 10.1007/s11695-017-2666-x.

3. Bhandari M, Fobi MAL, Buchwald JN et al. Standardization of bariatric metabolic procedures: World consensus meeting statement. Obes Surg. 2019; 29: 309-345. doi: 10.1007/s11695-019-04032-x.

4. Buchs NC, Morel P, Azagury DE et al. Laparoscopic versus robotic roux-en-y gastric bypass: Lessons and long-term follow-up learned from a large prospective monocentric study. Obes Surg. 2014; 24: 2031-2039. doi: 10.1007/s11695-014-1335-6.

5. Buchs NC, Addeo P, Bianco FM et al. Perioperative risk assessment, in robotic general surgery: Lessons learned from 884 cases at a single institution. Arch Surg. 2012; 147: 701-708. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.2012.496.

6. Dudash M, Kuhn J, Dove J et al. The longitudinal efficiency of robotic surgery: an MBSAQIP propensity matched 4-year comparison of robotic and laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Obes Surg. 2020; 30: 3706-3713. doi: 10.1007/s11695-020-04712-z.

7. Lundberg PW, Stoltzfus J, El Chaar M. 30-day outcomes of robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: First analysis based on MBSAQIP. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2019; 15: 1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.soard.2018.10.015.

8. El Chaar M, Gacke J, Ringold S, Stoltzfus J. Cost analysis of robotic sleeve gastrectomy (R-SG) compared with laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (L-SG) in a single academic center: debunking a myth! Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2019;15: 675-679. doi: 10.1016/j.soard.2019.02.012.

9. DeMaria EJ, Sugerman HJ, Kellum JM, Meador JG, Wolfe LG. Results of 281 consecutive total laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypasses to treat morbid obesity. Ann Surg. 2002; 235: 640-647. doi: 10.1097/00000658-200205000-00005.

10. Jung MK, Hagen ME, Buchs NC, Buehler LH, Morel P. Robotic bariatric surgery: A general review of the current status. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg. 2017; 13: 1-8. doi: 10.1002/rcs.1834.

11. Vilallonga R, Fort JM, Caubet E, Gonzalez O, Armengol M. Robotic sleeve gastrectomy versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: A comparative study with 200 patients. Obes Surg. 2013; 23: 1501-1507. doi: 10.1007/s11695-013-1039-3.

12. Romero RJ, Kosanovic R, Rabaza JR et al. Robotic sleeve gastrectomy: Experience of 134 cases and comparison with a systematic review of the laparoscopic approach. Obes Surg. 2013; 23: 1743-1752. doi: 10.1007/s11695-013-1004-1

13. Ayloo S, Buchs NC, Addeo P, Bianco FM, Giulianotti PC. Robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy for super-morbidly obese patients. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech. 2011; 21: 295-299. doi: 10.1089/lap.2010.0398.

14. Nasser H, Ivanics T, Ranjal RS, Leonard-Murali S, Genaw J. Perioperative outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy in the superobese. J Surg Res. 2020; 249: 34-41. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2019.12.012

15. Elli E, Gonzalez-Heredia R, Sarvepalli S, Masrur M. Laparoscopic and robotic sleeve gastrectomy: short- and long-term results. Obes Surg. 2015; 25: 967-974. doi: 10.1007/s11695-014-1499-0.

16. Bindal V, Bhatia P, Dudeja. Review of contemporary role of robotics in bariatric surgery. J Minim Access Surg. 2015; 11: 16-21. doi: 10.4103/0972-9941.147673.

17. Lee S, Carmody B, Wolfe L. Effect of location and speed of diagnosis on anastomotic leak outcomes in 3828 gastric bypass cases. J Gastrointest Surg. 2007; 11: 708-713. doi:10.1007/s11605-007-0085-3.

18. Choussein S, Srouji SS, Farland LV. Robotic Assistance Confers Ambidexterity to Laparoscopic Surgeons. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018; 25: 76-83. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.07.010.

19. Magouliotis DE, Tasiopoulou VS, Sioka E, Zacharoulis D. Robotic versus Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy for Morbid Obesity: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Obes Surg. 2017; 27: 245-253. doi: 10.1007/s11695-016-2444-1.

20. Moon RC, Stephenson D, Royall NA, Teixeira AF, Jawad MA. Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: learning curve, perioperative, and short-term outcomes. Obes Surg. 2016; 26: 2463-2468. doi: 10.1007/s11695-016-2131-2.