1
|
The Impact of Robotics in Learning Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Retrospective Analysis of 214 Laparoscopic and Robotic Procedures : Robotic Vs. Laparoscopic RYGB. Obes Surg 2021; 30:2403-2410. [PMID: 32124220 PMCID: PMC7475058 DOI: 10.1007/s11695-020-04508-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Proximal Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is commonly used to manage obesity, performed using laparoscopic or robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery. As the prevalence of robotic bariatric surgery increases, further data is required to justify its use. METHODS This was a large, retrospective analysis of prospectively recorded data for Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) procedures performed using laparoscopic (LRYGB) or robotic (RRYGB; da Vinci Xi system, Intuitive Surgical Sàrl) surgery between January 2016 and March 2019. The surgical techniques did not differ apart from different trocar placements. Data collected included patient characteristics before and after RYGB, operative outcomes and complications. RESULTS In total, 114 RRYGB and 108 LRYGB primary surgeries were performed. There were no significant differences between the groups, apart from a significantly shorter duration of surgery (116.9 vs. 128.9 min, respectively), lower C-reactive protein values at days 1 (31.1 vs. 44.1 mg/l) and 2 (50.3 vs. 77.8 mg/l) after the intervention, and overall complication rate (4.4 vs. 12.0%, Clavien-Dindo classification II-V) with RRYGB compared with LRYGB. There was a lower hemoglobin value in the postoperative course after RRYGB (12.1 vs. 12.6 g/dl, day 2). CONCLUSIONS In our experience, robotic RYGB has proven to be safe and efficient, with a shorter duration of surgery and lower rate of complications than laparoscopic RYGB. RRYGB is easier to learn and seems safer in less experienced centers. Increasing experience with the robotic system can reduce the duration of surgery over time. Further studies with higher evidence level are necessary to confirm our results.
Collapse
|
2
|
Beckmann JH, Mehdorn AS, Kersebaum JN, von Schönfels W, Taivankhuu T, Laudes M, Egberts JH, Becker T. Pros and Cons of Robotic Revisional Bariatric Surgery. Visc Med 2020; 36:238-245. [PMID: 32775356 DOI: 10.1159/000507742] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/01/2020] [Accepted: 04/03/2020] [Indexed: 01/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction Revisional procedures in bariatric surgery are regarded as technically more demanding and riskier than primary interventions. While the use of the surgical robot has not yet proven to be advantageous in primary bariatric interventions, the question remains whether its use is justified for more complex revisional procedures. Objective To show that revisional bariatric surgery can be performed safely using the da Vinci® Xi surgical system. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively recorded data for revisional bariatric procedures between January 2016 and November 2019. Results Of 78 revision operations, four (5.1%) were performed by open surgery, 30 (38.5%) by laparoscopic surgery, and 44 (56.4%) by robotic surgery. A comparative analysis of robotic (n = 41) versus laparoscopic (n = 18) revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypasses (rRYGB) revealed significant differences favoring the robotic approach for operative time (130.7 vs. 167.6 min), C-reactive protein values at days 1 (27.9 vs. 49.1 mg/L) and 2 (48.2 vs. 83.6 mg/L) after surgery, and length of stay (4.9 vs. 6.2 days). Lower complication rates (Clavien-Dindo II-V) were found after rRRYGB (7.3 vs. 22.2%, not significant). Conclusions Revisional bariatric surgery using a robotic system is safe. The operative time performing rRRYGB is significantly shorter than rLRYGB in our experience. Otherwise, results were largely comparable. Due to different indications, different index operations and a wide range of revisional procedures, further studies are necessary to confirm these results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jan Henrik Beckmann
- Department of General, Visceral-, Thoracic-, Transplantation-, and Pediatric Surgery, Kurt-Semm Center for Laparoscopic and Robotic Assisted Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Anne-Sophie Mehdorn
- Department of General, Visceral-, Thoracic-, Transplantation-, and Pediatric Surgery, Kurt-Semm Center for Laparoscopic and Robotic Assisted Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Jan-Niclas Kersebaum
- Department of General, Visceral-, Thoracic-, Transplantation-, and Pediatric Surgery, Kurt-Semm Center for Laparoscopic and Robotic Assisted Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Witigo von Schönfels
- Department of General, Visceral-, Thoracic-, Transplantation-, and Pediatric Surgery, Kurt-Semm Center for Laparoscopic and Robotic Assisted Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Terbish Taivankhuu
- Department of General, Visceral-, Thoracic-, Transplantation-, and Pediatric Surgery, Kurt-Semm Center for Laparoscopic and Robotic Assisted Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Matthias Laudes
- I. Department of Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Jan-Hendrik Egberts
- Department of General, Visceral-, Thoracic-, Transplantation-, and Pediatric Surgery, Kurt-Semm Center for Laparoscopic and Robotic Assisted Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Thomas Becker
- Department of General, Visceral-, Thoracic-, Transplantation-, and Pediatric Surgery, Kurt-Semm Center for Laparoscopic and Robotic Assisted Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Low Postoperative Levels of C-Reactive Protein Are an Early Predictor for an Uncomplicated Course After Bariatric Surgery: A Retrospective, Validated Cohort Study. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2020; 30:238-244. [PMID: 32032332 DOI: 10.1097/sle.0000000000000767] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Bariatric surgery is popularly used to treat or prevent morbidity in severely obese patients. Severe complications are rare, but their early detection has a significant impact on clinical outcomes. We aimed to determine whether blood tests in the first few postoperative days are reliable predictors for complications. METHODS We retrospectively analyzed 1073 patients who underwent laparoscopic bariatric surgery between 2009 and 2018 at our center. Clinical outcome was correlated with postoperative serum C-reactive protein (CRP), white blood cell count, and vital signs, analyzed using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. A total of 570 procedures between 2009 and 2015 were used to calculate the best cutoff values (calculation group), which were validated with 330 different patients operated upon between 2016 and 2018 (validation group). RESULTS Twenty-four patients (4.2%) developed anastomotic or staple-line leakages in the calculation group. The ROC curve showed a good reliability for CRP levels on day 2 (area under the ROC curve=0.86); the highest Youden index existed for a cutoff of 119 mg/L. White blood cell count and heart rate were poor predictors. Even though several characteristics differed in the validation cohort, test quality of the cutoff was high (sensitivity, 71.4%; specificity, 94.9%; positive predictive value, 23.8%; negative predictive value, 99.3%). The prediction was excellent especially for leakages appearing on days 2 to 9 (sensitivity 100.0%, negative predictive value 100%). Leakages from day 10 were rare and prediction poor (sensitivity 0%). CONCLUSIONS A CRP level on day 2 <120 mg/L is a good predictor of a postoperative course without leakage, even though the predictive value goes down for late-appearing events. An earlier CRP measurement added no predictive benefit. The cutoff value was validated in an internal cohort and could be applied to different populations.
Collapse
|
4
|
Beckmann JH, Kersebaum JN, von Schönfels W, Becker T, Schafmayer C, Egberts JH. Use of barbed sutures in robotic bariatric bypass surgery: a single-center case series. BMC Surg 2019; 19:97. [PMID: 31337375 PMCID: PMC6651907 DOI: 10.1186/s12893-019-0563-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2019] [Accepted: 07/16/2019] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Surgical robots are increasingly being used in bariatric surgery. While several studies describe the safety of using barbed sutures in laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery, no reports are available for robotic bariatric procedures. The aim of our article is to determine whether barbed sutures can be used safely in robotic Roux-en-Y bypass (RYGB) surgery. METHODS This was a single-center, single-surgeon case series of RYGB procedures using the da Vinci® Xi Surgical System (Intuitive Surgery, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) in combination with the use of barbed sutures (Stratafix, Ethicon, Johnson & Johnson, Cincinnati, OH, USA). RESULTS Fifty robotic proximal and distal RYGB surgeries were performed. A linear stapled, side-to-side gastrojejunostomy was carried out, whereby the enterotomy was completed with a running resorbable unidirectional barbed suture, Stratafix 2-0. In one case after robotic proximal RYGB, revision surgery was required due to omentum necrosis. Another patient was readmitted due to gastrointestinal bleeding from anastomosis. No anastomotic insufficiencies, no stenoses, or higher-grade complications according to Clavien-Dindo 4a-5 were found. CONCLUSIONS We found that the use of self-fixing barbed sutures in robotic RYGB is safe. The self-fixing suture enables the robotic surgeon to perform a simple continuous suture without the need for recurrent retraction. Although we are the first to report this procedure, we had a low number of cases and no control group; thus, further studies with a higher level of evidence are required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jan Henrik Beckmann
- Department of General, Visceral-, Thoracic-, Transplantation-, and Pediatric Surgery, Kurt-Semm Center for Laparoscopic and Robotic Assisted Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold Heller Strasse 3, 24105, Kiel, Germany.
| | - Jan-Niclas Kersebaum
- Department of General, Visceral-, Thoracic-, Transplantation-, and Pediatric Surgery, Kurt-Semm Center for Laparoscopic and Robotic Assisted Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold Heller Strasse 3, 24105, Kiel, Germany
| | - Witigo von Schönfels
- Department of General, Visceral-, Thoracic-, Transplantation-, and Pediatric Surgery, Kurt-Semm Center for Laparoscopic and Robotic Assisted Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold Heller Strasse 3, 24105, Kiel, Germany
| | - Thomas Becker
- Department of General, Visceral-, Thoracic-, Transplantation-, and Pediatric Surgery, Kurt-Semm Center for Laparoscopic and Robotic Assisted Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold Heller Strasse 3, 24105, Kiel, Germany
| | - Clemens Schafmayer
- Department of General, Visceral-, Thoracic-, Transplantation-, and Pediatric Surgery, Kurt-Semm Center for Laparoscopic and Robotic Assisted Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold Heller Strasse 3, 24105, Kiel, Germany
| | - Jan Hendrik Egberts
- Department of General, Visceral-, Thoracic-, Transplantation-, and Pediatric Surgery, Kurt-Semm Center for Laparoscopic and Robotic Assisted Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold Heller Strasse 3, 24105, Kiel, Germany
| |
Collapse
|