Robotic surgery in emergency setting: 2021 WSES position paper

Establishment of a 24/7 robotic acute care surgery program at a large academic medical center

BACKGROUND

For many years, robotic surgery has been an option for various elective surgical procedures. Though robotic surgery has not traditionally been the first choice for acute surgical patients, recent work has shown promise in broader applications. However, there are limited data regarding how to establish an institutional robotics program for higher acuity patients. This project aimed to map a pathway for the creation of an acute care surgery robotic program at a large academic medical center.

METHODS

Various stakeholders were gathered jointly with our surgical faculty: anesthesia, operating room leadership, surgical technologists, circulating nurses, Central Sterile Supply, and Intuitive Surgical Inc. representatives. Staff underwent robotics training, and surgical technologists were trained as bedside first assistants. Nontraditional robotic operating rooms were allocated for coordinated placement of appropriate cases, and pre-made case carts were arranged with staff to be available at all hours. A workflow was created between surgical faculty and staff to streamline add-on robotic cases to the daily schedule.

RESULTS

Six faculty and two fellows are now credentialed in robotics surgery, and additional surgeons are undergoing training. Numerous staff have completed training to perform operative assistant duties. The operating capacity of robotic acute care surgeries has more than doubled in just one year, from 77 to 172 cases between 2022 and 2023, respectively. Two add-on cases can be accommodated per day. Select patients are being offered robotic surgeries in the acute surgical setting, and ongoing efforts are being made to create guidelines for which patients would best benefit from robotic procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Launching a successful robotic surgery program requires a coordinated, multidisciplinary effort to ensure seamless integration into daily operations. Additional assistance from outside technology representatives can help to ensure comfort with procedures. Further studies are needed to determine the acute patient population that may benefit most from robotic surgery.

Step-by-step roadmap to building a robotic acute care surgery program (RACSP) in a level I trauma center: outcomes and lessons learned after 1-year implementation

Minimally invasive surgical techniques have demonstrated superior outcomes across various elective procedures. Laparoscopic surgery (LS) is established in general surgery with laparoscopic operations for acute appendicitis and cholecystitis being the standard of care. Robotic surgery (RS) has been associated with equivalent or improved postoperative outcomes compared with LS. This increasing uptake of RS in emergency general surgery has encouraged the adoption of robotic acute care programs across the world. The key elements required to build a sustainable RS program are an enthusiastic surgical team, intensive training, resources and marketing. This review is a comprehensive layout elaborating the step-by-step process that has helped our high-volume level I trauma center in establishing a successful robotic acute care surgery program.

Robotic versus laparoscopic general surgery in the emergency setting: a systematic review

Robot-assisted general surgery, an advanced technology in minimally invasive procedures, is increasingly employed in elective general surgery, showing benefits over laparoscopy in specific cases. Although laparoscopy remains a standard approach for common acute abdominal conditions, the role of robotic surgery in emergency general surgery remains uncertain. This systematic review aims to compare outcomes in acute general surgery settings for robotic versus laparoscopic surgeries. A PRISMA-compliant systematic search across MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and the Cochrane Library was conducted. The literature review focused on articles comparing perioperative outcomes of emergency general surgery managed laparoscopically versus robot-assisted. A descriptive analysis was performed, and outcome measures were recorded. Six articles, involving 1,063 patients, compared outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic procedures. Two articles covered cholecystectomies, while the others addressed ileocaecal resection, subtotal colectomy, hiatal hernia and repair of perforated gastrojejunal ulcers. The level of evidence was low. Laparoscopic bowel resection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) had higher complications; no significant differences were found in complications for other operations. Operative time showed no differences for cholecystectomies, but robotic approaches took longer for other procedures. Robotic cases had shorter hospital length of stay, although the associated costs were significantly higher. Perioperative outcomes for emergency robotic surgery in selected general surgery conditions are comparable to laparoscopic surgery. However, recommending robotic surgery in the acute setting necessitates a well-powered large population study for stronger evidence.

Robotic approach to colonic resection: For some or for all patients?

The robotic approach is rapidly gaining momentum in colorectal surgery. Its benefits in pelvic surgery have been extensively discussed and are well established amongst those who perform minimally invasive surgery. However, the same cannot be said for the robotic approach for colonic resection, where its role is still debated. Here we aim to provide an extensive debate between selective and absolute use of the robotic approach for colonic resection by combining the thoughts of experts in the field of robotic and minimally invasive colorectal surgery, dissecting all key aspects for a critical view on this exciting new paradigm in colorectal surgery.

National trends and outcomes of robotic emergency general surgery in the United States

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted surgery has seen exponential adoption over the last decade. Although the safety and efficacy of robotic surgery in the elective setting have been demonstrated, data regarding robotic emergency general surgery remains sparse.

METHODS

All adults undergoing non-elective appendectomy, cholecystectomy, small or large bowel resection, perforated ulcer repair, or lysis of adhesions were identified in the 2008 to 2020 National Inpatient Sample. Temporal trends were analyzed using a rank-based, non-parametric test developed by Cuzick (nptrend). Using laparoscopy as a reference, multivariable regressions were used to evaluate the association between robotic techniques and in-hospital mortality, major complications, and resource use for each emergency general surgery operation.

RESULTS

Of an estimated 4,040,555 patients undergoing emergency general surgery, 65,853 (1.6%) were performed using robotic techniques. The robotic proportion of minimally invasive emergency general surgery increased significantly overall, with the largest growth seen in robot-assisted large bowel resections and perforated ulcer repairs. After adjustment for various patient and hospital-level factors, robot-assisted large bowel resection (adjusted odds ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.58-0.91) and cholecystectomy (adjusted odds ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.55-0.81) were associated with significantly reduced odds of perioperative blood transfusion compared to traditional laparoscopy. Although robotic techniques were associated with modest reductions in postoperative length of stay, costs were uniformly higher by increments of up to $4,900.

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery appears to be a safe and effective adjunct to laparoscopy in minimally invasive emergency general surgery, although comparable cost-effectiveness has yet to be realized. Increasing use of robotic techniques in emergency general surgery may be attributable in part to reduced complications, including blood loss, in certain operative contexts.

The role of RObotic surgery in EMergency setting (ROEM): protocol for a multicentre, observational, prospective international study on the use of robotic platform in emergency surgery

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery has gained widespread acceptance in elective interventions, yet its role in emergency procedures remains underexplored. While the 2021 WSES position paper discussed limited studies on the application of robotics in emergency general surgery, it recommended strict patient selection, adequate training, and improved platform accessibility. This prospective study aims to define the role of robotic surgery in emergency settings, evaluating intraoperative and postoperative outcomes and assessing its feasibility and safety.

METHODS

The ROEM study is an observational, prospective, multicentre, international analysis of clinically stable adult patients undergoing robotic surgery for emergency treatment of acute pathologies including diverticulitis, cholecystitis, and obstructed hernias. Data collection includes patient demographics and intervention details. Furthermore, data relating to the operating theatre team and the surgical instruments used will be collected in order to conduct a cost analysis. The study plans to enrol at least 500 patients from 50 participating centres, with each centre having a local lead and collaborators. All data will be collected and stored online through a secure server running the Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) web application. Ethical considerations and data governance will be paramount, requiring local ethical committee approvals from participating centres.

DISCUSSION

Current literature and expert consensus suggest the feasibility of robotic surgery in emergencies with proper support. However, challenges include staff training, scheduling conflicts with elective surgeries, and increased costs. The ROEM study seeks to contribute valuable data on the safety, feasibility, and cost-effectiveness of robotic surgery in emergency settings, focusing on specific pathologies. Previous studies on cholecystitis, abdominal hernias, and diverticulitis provide insights into the benefits and challenges of robotic approaches. It is necessary to identify patient populations that benefit most from robotic emergency surgery to optimize outcomes and justify costs.

Bone Anchor Fixation in the Repair of Blunt Traumatic Abdominal Wall Hernias: A Western Trauma Association Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Blunt traumatic abdominal wall hernias (TAWHs) are rare but require a variety of operative techniques to repair including bone anchor fixation (BAF) when tissue tears off bony structures. This study aimed to provide a descriptive analysis of BAF technique for blunt TAWH repair. Bone anchor fixation and no BAF repairs were compared, hypothesizing increased hernia recurrence with BAF repair.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of the WTA blunt TAWH multicenter study was performed including all patients who underwent repair of their TAWH. Patients with BAF were compared to those with no BAF with bivariate analyses.

RESULTS

176 patients underwent repair of their TAWH with 41 (23.3%) undergoing BAF. 26 (63.4%) patients had tissue fixed to bone, with 7 of those reinforced with mesh. The remaining 15 (36.6%) patients had bridging mesh anchored to bone. The BAF group had a similar age, sex, body mass index, and injury severity score compared to the no BAF group. The time to repair (1 vs 1 days, P = .158), rate of hernia recurrence (9.8% vs 12.7%, P = .786), and surgical site infection (SSI) (12.5% vs 15.6%, P = .823) were all similar between cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

This largest series to date found nearly one-quarter of TAWH repairs required BAF. Bone anchor fixation repairs had a similar rate of hernia recurrence and SSI compared to no BAF repairs, suggesting this is a reasonable option for repair of TAWH. However, future prospective studies are needed to compare specific BAF techniques and evaluate long-term outcomes including patient-centered outcomes such as pain and quality of life.

Comparative Analysis of Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Review

Appendectomy ranks among the most common surgical procedures. Laparoscopic appendectomy has become increasingly popular among certain surgeons. Even laparoscopic appendectomy is considered the gold standard; many surgical subspecialties have adopted robotic surgery in the past 10 years. The robotic system is recognized for enhancing stability, visualization, precision, and spatial flexibility. Surgeons can operate with enhanced dexterity, reduced tremors, three-dimensional visualization, up to 10 times magnification, and control over four arms thanks to improved ergonomics that allow them to sit at a customizable console. The purpose of this study is to evaluate and compare the overall effects, such as intraoperative time, postoperative recovery, feasibility for surgeons, and cost-effectiveness, of robotic-assisted appendectomy and laparoscopic appendectomy through the available literature. It was found that both robotic and laparoscopic surgeries work well for appendectomy, but in some studies, it was found that robotic surgery comes with the perks of shorter hospital stays and quicker recovery, even though it is more expensive, and in some studies, no differences were observed in patient recovery postoperatively. Laparoscopic surgery is still a highly effective and commonly used method, with proven advantages over open appendectomy, despite taking longer for the procedure. We need more studies to fully understand the advantages and disadvantages of robotic surgery, especially when it comes to cost-effectiveness and wider health outcomes.

Robot-assisted thoracoscopic repair of tracheal gunshot wound

A 23-year-old man suffered two gunshot wounds and upon arrival to the emergency room was found on imaging to have a large pneumothorax with considerable subcutaneous emphysema. Intubation and placement of bilateral chest tubes did not improve the patient's oxygenation; bronchoscopy revealed a 1 cm tracheal defect in the membranous wall 4 cm proximal to the carina. The patient underwent robot-assisted primary repair of the tracheal injury with a #3-0 PDS Stratafix barbed suture buttressed with an intercostal muscle flap. The patient was discharged in good condition on post-operative day 17, with follow-up bronchoscopy showing complete healing of the trachea.

Robotic-assisted treatment of paraesophageal hernias in the emergency setting: a retrospective study

Emergency treatment of paraesophageal hernias can be carried out through laparotomy or minimally invasive approaches, however, evidence in this regard is weak. The aim of our study was to assess safety and feasibility of the robotic-assisted treatment of paraesophageal hernias in the emergency setting. At the Bellinzona e Valli Regional Hospital, Switzerland, we conducted a retrospective analysis of patients operated on from January 2020 to January 2024 with robotic surgery for emergency presentation of paraesophageal hernias. Demographic and clinical details, operative techniques, and postoperative outcomes were collected and analyzed. Out of 82 patients who underwent robotic-assisted paraesophageal hernia repair, 17 were treated in the emergency setting. Median age was 79 years (IQR 77-85), 3 (17.6%) patients were male, and median BMI was 23.9 kg/m2 (IQR 21.0-26.0). Most frequent presentation symptoms were pain (100%), regurgitation (88.2%), and dyspnea (17.6%). No intraoperative complication, conversion to open surgery or stomach resections were recorded. Two complications of grade 3 according to the Clavien-Dindo classification and one of grade 2 occurred; all were successfully treated until resolution. The median length of hospital stay was 8 days (IQR 5-16). After a mean follow-up of 15.9 months (IQR 6.5-25.6) only two small axial asymptomatic recurrences that required no treatment. Despite limitations, our study demonstrated a very low rate of intra- and postoperative complications, likely supporting the safety and feasibility of robotic-assisted treatment for paraesophageal hernias in emergency settings. Larger studies with a control arm are needed to validate our initial findings.

Perceptions of theatre team members to robotic assisted surgery and the aid of technology in colorectal surgery

The implementation of robotic assisted surgery (RAS) has brought in a change to the perception and roles of theatre staff, as well as the dynamics of the operative environment and team. This study aims to identify and describe current perceptions of theatre staff in the context of RAS. 12 semi-structured interviews were conducted in a tertiary level university hospital, where RAS is utilised in selected elective settings. Interviews were conducted by an experienced research nurse to staff of the colorectal department operating theatre (nursing, surgical and anaesthetics) with some experience in operating within open, laparoscopic and RAS surgical settings. Thematic analysis on all interviews was performed, with formation of preliminary themes. Respondents all discussed advantages of all modes of operating. All respondents appreciated the benefits of minimally invasive surgery, in the reduced physiological insult to patients. However, interviewees remarked on the current perceived limitations of RAS in terms of logistics. Some voiced apprehension and anxieties about the safety if an operation needs to be converted to open. An overarching theme with participants of all levels and backgrounds was the 'Teamwork' and the concept of the [robotic] team. The physical differences of RAS changes the traditional methods of communication, with the loss of face-to-face contact and the physical 'separation' of the surgeon from the rest of the operating team impacting theatre dynamics. It is vital to understand the staff cultures, concerns and perception to the use of this relatively new technology in colorectal surgery.

Robotic Technology in Emergency General Surgery Cases in the Era of Minimally Invasive Surgery

Importance

Although robotic surgery has become an established approach for a wide range of elective operations, data on its utility and outcomes are limited in the setting of emergency general surgery.

Objectives

To describe temporal trends in the use of laparoscopic and robotic approaches and compare outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for 4 common emergent surgical procedures.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective cohort study of an all-payer discharge database of 829 US facilities was conducted from calendar years 2013 to 2021. Data analysis was performed from July 2022 to November 2023. A total of 1 067 263 emergent or urgent cholecystectomies (n = 793 800), colectomies (n = 89 098), inguinal hernia repairs (n = 65 039), and ventral hernia repairs (n = 119 326) in patients aged 18 years or older were included.

Exposure

Surgical approach (robotic, laparoscopic, or open) to emergent or urgent cholecystectomy, colectomy, inguinal hernia repair, or ventral hernia repair.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the temporal trend in use of each operative approach (laparoscopic, robotic, or open). Secondary outcomes included conversion to open surgery and length of stay (both total and postoperative). Temporal trends were measured using linear regression. Propensity score matching was used to compare secondary outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery groups.

Results

During the study period, the use of robotic surgery increased significantly year-over-year for all procedures: 0.7% for cholecystectomy, 0.9% for colectomy, 1.9% for inguinal hernia repair, and 1.1% for ventral hernia repair. There was a corresponding decrease in the open surgical approach for all cases. Compared with laparoscopy, robotic surgery was associated with a significantly lower risk of conversion to open surgery: cholecystectomy, 1.7% vs 3.0% (odds ratio [OR], 0.55 [95% CI, 0.49-0.62]); colectomy, 11.2% vs 25.5% (OR, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.32-0.42]); inguinal hernia repair, 2.4% vs 10.7% (OR, 0.21 [95% CI, 0.16-0.26]); and ventral hernia repair, 3.5% vs 10.9% (OR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.25-0.36]). Robotic surgery was associated with shorter postoperative lengths of stay for colectomy (-0.48 [95% CI, -0.60 to -0.35] days), inguinal hernia repair (-0.20 [95% CI, -0.30 to -0.10] days), and ventral hernia repair (-0.16 [95% CI, -0.26 to -0.06] days).

Conclusions and Relevance

While robotic surgery is still not broadly used for emergency general surgery, the findings of this study suggest it is becoming more prevalent and may be associated with better outcomes as measured by reduced conversion to open surgery and decreased length of stay.

The Great Debate: Robotic vs Traditional Surgical Approach in the Acute Care Setting

Robotic surgery was first introduced in the 1980s as a system to aid patients in the battlefield. Since then, robotic surgery has become an important minimally invasive tool and plays an important role in elective surgery among various surgical specialties. However, the role for robotic surgery in the emergent setting is not well established or studied. Robotic surgery has been shown to be advantageous to both patients and operating surgeons. Though limited, studies have found robotic surgery in the acute setting to be safe for patients. These studies found robotic surgery to have improved perioperative outcomes when compared to an open or laparoscopic approach. Additionally, the robotic platform is thought to be an effective tool to prevent conversion to open procedures in emergent settings. Although some studies demonstrate advantages to robotic acute surgery, others have shown increased complications with robotic acute surgery or no distinct advantage when comparing robotic to laparoscopic surgery. Additionally, some of the published papers supporting the use of robotic surgery in the emergent setting may have a degree of bias favoring the robotic platform. Robotic surgery is a mainstay in minimally invasive elective surgery and gaining popularity among patients and surgeons. There are pros and cons to the adaptation of the robotic platform in the acute care setting. Additional large population studies are indicated to determine the true role of the robotic platform in the emergent setting.

Goodbye Hartmann trial: a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study on the current use of a surgical procedure developed a century ago

BACKGROUND

Literature suggests colonic resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) instead of Hartmann's procedure (HP) for the treatment of left-sided colonic emergencies. We aim to evaluate the surgical options globally used to treat patients with acute left-sided colonic emergencies and the factors that leading to the choice of treatment, comparing HP and RPA.

METHODS

This is a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. A total 1215 patients with left-sided colonic emergencies who required surgery were included from 204 centers during the period of March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2020. with a 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

564 patients (43.1%) were females. The mean age was 65.9 ± 15.6 years. HP was performed in 697 (57.3%) patients and RPA in 384 (31.6%) cases. Complicated acute diverticulitis was the most common cause of left-sided colonic emergencies (40.2%), followed by colorectal malignancy (36.6%). Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3b) were higher in the HP group (P < 0.001). 30-day mortality was higher in HP patients (13.7%), especially in case of bowel perforation and diffused peritonitis. 1-year follow-up showed no differences on ostomy reversal rate between HP and RPA. (P = 0.127). A backward likelihood logistic regression model showed that RPA was preferred in younger patients, having low ASA score (≤ 3), in case of large bowel obstruction, absence of colonic ischemia, longer time from admission to surgery, operating early at the day working hours, by a surgeon who performed more than 50 colorectal resections.

CONCLUSIONS

After 100 years since the first Hartmann's procedure, HP remains the most common treatment for left-sided colorectal emergencies. Treatment's choice depends on patient characteristics, the time of surgery and the experience of the surgeon. RPA should be considered as the gold standard for surgery, with HP being an exception.

The increasing use of minimally invasive surgery in acute general surgical conditions: A decade of results from a national data set

BACKGROUND

To assess the rate of uptake of acute laparoscopic surgery for common general surgical conditions using national-level data.

METHODS

The use of laparoscopic surgery in the acute management of appendicitis, cholecystitis, adhesive small bowel obstruction, and inguinal hernias was assessed between 2013 and 2022 at a national level in New Zealand.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic appendicectomy increased from 83% to 95% (P = .0002). Laparoscopic cholecystectomy increased from 94% to 96% (P = .001). Laparoscopic adhesiolysis increased from 42% to 60% (P = .001). Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair increased from 3% to 18% (P = .004). The rate of laparoscopic conversion demonstrated a decrease for appendicectomy (1.9% to 0.24%), cholecystectomy (0.77% to 0.39%), and adhesiolysis (9% to 2.4%) across this time. The laparoscopic cohorts were all associated with a shorter and less expensive length of stay compared to the open cohort. Māori and Pacific Island patients had largely equitable or superior rates of laparoscopic use compared to the rest of the population. No changes in laparoscopic use were detected during the COVID-19 pandemic. Rates of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and appendicectomy are similar throughout the regions. The largest difference in rates detected was for adhesiolysis, which was more common in the northern region.

CONCLUSION

There has been a statistically significant rise in the use of acute laparoscopic surgery for acute general surgical procedures. This rise is likely clinically and economically significant, particularly in appendicectomy and adhesiolysis, with rises of 12% and 17% across the 10 years, with the known associated patient and health care system benefits.

Robot-assisted minimally invasive bronchial resection with primary anastomosis for schwannoma arising from left main bronchus: a case report

Background

Tracheobronchial schwannomas are extremely rare, which account for lower than 0.2% in all pulmonary tumors. In large part because of the rarity and insufficient reported clinical details, tracheobronchial schwannoma lacks guidelines or expert consensus for diagnosis and treatment, and the delay in diagnosis can range from months to years. The main treatment option is surgery. Endoscopic intervention can also be selected. An increasing number of thoracic surgery cases were performed on the robotic platforms in recent years. With their assistance, surgeons can accomplish the high technique required surgical procedures with ease.

Case Description

In this case, a 48-year-old female had a history of shortness of breath for more than 1 year. The chest computed tomography (CT) and bronchoscopy examination revealed a new growth of nodule in the left main bronchus. The nodule was considered a schwannoma by transbronchial biopsy, which was removed by robot-assisted bronchial resection with primary anastomosis. The application of Da Vinci Si robotic surgical system benefited the process of this surgery. Pathology and immunohistochemistry results confirmed the diagnosis of schwannomas. The patient tolerated the treatment without any complications. No sign of recurrence was discovered at present, 6 months after the intervention.

Conclusions

We reported the first sleeve resection for bronchial schwannoma using Da Vinci robotic surgical system. The clinical details of tracheobronchial schwannoma should be revealed more specifically to achieve more systematic diagnosis and treatment.

Robotic Cholecystectomy Remains Safe and Effective After Regular Staffing Hours

Background Robotic-assisted surgery continues to grow in popularity. Access during evenings and weekends for non-elective operations can be restricted out of safety concerns. We sought to analyze and compare outcomes of patients undergoing robotic cholecystectomy, a common urgent procedure for acute calculous cholecystitis, during regular hours versus evenings or weekends. Based on this comparison, we sought to determine if this restriction is justified. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of 46 patients who underwent robotic cholecystectomy for acute calculous cholecystitis per 2018 Tokyo criteria by a single surgeon at a single institution between 2021 and 2022. Patients were grouped as undergoing "after-hours" cholecystectomy if the operation started at five pm or later, or anytime during the weekend (Saturday, Sunday). Demographic, perioperative, and outcome variables were tabulated and analyzed. For illustrative purposes, the data presented as median ± standard deviation were applicable. Results After-hours cholecystectomy occurred in 26 patients and regular-hours cholecystectomy occurred in 20 patients. There were no significant differences in perioperative variables between the two cohorts in terms of body mass index, age, gender, cirrhotic status, American Society of Anesthesiology score, white blood cell count, or neutrophil percentage. The after-hours group had more prior abdominal operations. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of operative time, estimated blood loss, or length of stay. There were no mortalities. There was one readmission in the after-hours cohort unrelated to the operation. Conclusion Robotic cholecystectomy can be safely performed on the weekends and evenings. Hospitals should make the robotic platform available during this time.

Abdominal Wall Hernias-State of the Art of Laparoscopic versus Robotic Surgery

Abdominal wall hernia repair, a common surgical procedure, includes various techniques to minimize postoperative complications and enhance outcomes. This review focuses on the comparison between laparoscopic and robotic approaches in treating inguinal and ventral hernias, presenting the ongoing situation of this topic. A systematic search identified relevant studies comparing laparoscopic and robotic approaches for inguinal and ventral hernias. Randomized control trials, retrospective, and prospective studies published after 1 January 2000, were included. Search terms such as hernia, inguinal, ventral, laparoscopy, robotic, and surgery were used. A total of 23 articles were included for analysis. Results indicated similar short-term outcomes for robotic and laparoscopic techniques in inguinal hernia repair, with robotic groups experiencing less postoperative pain. However, longer operative times and higher costs were associated with robotic repair. Robotic ventral hernia repair demonstrated potential benefits, including shorter hospital stay, lower recurrence and lower reoperation rates. While robotic surgery offers advantages such as shorter hospital stays, faster recovery, and less postoperative pain, challenges including costs and training requirements need consideration. The choice between laparoscopic and robotic approaches for abdominal wall hernias should be tailored based on individual surgeon expertise and resource availability, emphasizing a balanced evaluation of benefits and challenges.

Cesena guidelines: WSES consensus statement on laparoscopic-first approach to general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy is widely adopted across nearly all surgical subspecialties in the elective setting. Initially finding indication in minor abdominal emergencies, it has gradually become the standard approach in the majority of elective general surgery procedures. Despite many technological advances and increasing acceptance, the laparoscopic approach remains underutilized in emergency general surgery and in abdominal trauma. Emergency laparotomy continues to carry a high morbidity and mortality. In recent years, there has been a growing interest from emergency and trauma surgeons in adopting minimally invasive surgery approaches in the acute surgical setting. The present position paper, supported by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), aims to provide a review of the literature to reach a consensus on the indications and benefits of a laparoscopic-first approach in patients requiring emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies or abdominal trauma.

METHODS

This position paper was developed according to the WSES methodology. A steering committee performed the literature review and drafted the position paper. An international panel of 54 experts then critically revised the manuscript and discussed it in detail, to develop a consensus on a position statement.

RESULTS

A total of 323 studies (systematic review and meta-analysis, randomized clinical trial, retrospective comparative cohort studies, case series) have been selected from an initial pool of 7409 studies. Evidence demonstrates several benefits of the laparoscopic approach in stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgical emergencies or abdominal trauma. The selection of a stable patient seems to be of paramount importance for a safe adoption of a laparoscopic approach. In hemodynamically stable patients, the laparoscopic approach was found to be safe, feasible and effective as a therapeutic tool or helpful to identify further management steps and needs, resulting in improved outcomes, regardless of conversion. Appropriate patient selection, surgeon experience and rigorous minimally invasive surgical training, remain crucial factors to increase the adoption of laparoscopy in emergency general surgery and abdominal trauma.

CONCLUSIONS

The WSES expert panel suggests laparoscopy as the first approach for stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma.

A retrospective study of laparoscopic, robotic-assisted, and open emergent/urgent cholecystectomy based on the PINC AI Healthcare Database 2017-2020

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted cholecystectomy (RAC) is becoming increasingly common, but the outcomes of emergent/urgent robotic-assisted cholecystectomies compared to emergent laparoscopic (LC) and open cholecystectomies (OC) remain understudied.

METHODS

The PINC AI Healthcare Database was queried to identify adults who underwent emergent or urgent (Em-Ur) cholecystectomy between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2020. Immediate postoperative and 30-day outcomes were identified including intraoperative complications, transfusion, conversion, postoperative complication, and hospital length of stay. Propensity score matching was done to compare outcomes between Em-Ur robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open cholecystectomies Subgroup analyses were performed comparing RAC done with and without fluorescent imaging as well as comparing RAC and LC performed for patients with class 3 obesity (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2).

RESULTS

RAC Em-Ur cholecystectomies are being performed with increasing frequency and is the most utilized modality for patients with class 3 obesity. There was no difference in intraoperative complications (0.3%), bile duct injury (0.2%), or postoperative outcomes between RAC and LC. LC had significantly shorter operating room times (96 min (75,128)) compared to RAC (120 min (90,150)). There was a significant lower rate of conversion to open in RAC (1.9%) relative to LC (3.2%) in both the overall population and the class 3 obesity sub-analysis (RAC-2.6% vs. LC-4.4%). There was no difference in outcomes in robotic-assisted cholecystectomies done with and without fluorescent imaging.

CONCLUSIONS

A comparison of propensity score-matched cohorts of emergent/urgent robotic-assisted and laparoscopic cholecystectomy indicates that robotic-assisted cholecystectomy is a safe alternative to laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and that both have superior outcomes to open cholecystectomies.

Robotic Appendicectomy: A review of feasibility

Acute appendicitis is one of the most common abdominal emergencies. There has been an increasing use of robotic abdominal surgery. However, it remains underutilised in emergency settings. This study aimed to systematically review robotic appendicectomy (RA) feasibility. A 20-year systematic review was performed, along with quality assessment. The research protocol was registered with PROSPERO. The search yielded 1,242 citations, including 9 articles. The mean quality score was 10.72 ± 2.56. The endpoints across the studies were rate of conversion to open surgery, length of hospital stay, blood loss and operative time. RA is a safe, feasible technique that can be performed in elective and emergency settings with minimal blood loss. The operative time and hospital stay were within acceptable limits. Robotic surgery's major drawback is its high cost and limited availability. Future studies evaluating RA with a focus on its application during emergencies and its cost-effectiveness are recommended.

2023 WSES guidelines for the prevention, detection, and management of iatrogenic urinary tract injuries (IUTIs) during emergency digestive surgery

Iatrogenic urinary tract injury (IUTI) is a severe complication of emergency digestive surgery. It can lead to increased postoperative morbidity and mortality and have a long-term impact on the quality of life. The reported incidence of IUTIs varies greatly among the studies, ranging from 0.3 to 1.5%. Given the high volume of emergency digestive surgery performed worldwide, there is a need for well-defined and effective strategies to prevent and manage IUTIs. Currently, there is a lack of consensus regarding the prevention, detection, and management of IUTIs in the emergency setting. The present guidelines, promoted by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), were developed following a systematic review of the literature and an international expert panel discussion. The primary aim of these WSES guidelines is to provide evidence-based recommendations to support clinicians and surgeons in the prevention, detection, and management of IUTIs during emergency digestive surgery. The following key aspects were considered: (1) effectiveness of preventive interventions for IUTIs during emergency digestive surgery; (2) intra-operative detection of IUTIs and appropriate management strategies; (3) postoperative detection of IUTIs and appropriate management strategies and timing; and (4) effectiveness of antibiotic therapy (including type and duration) in case of IUTIs.

Could trauma laparoscopy be the standard of care for hemodynamically stable patients? A retrospective analysis of 165 cases

BACKGROUND

Trauma laparoscopy may provide a less invasive alternative to laparotomy by providing accurate diagnosis and minimally invasive management of selected trauma patients. The risk of missing injuries during the laparoscopic evaluation still refrains surgeons from using this approach. Our aim was to evaluate feasibility and safety of trauma laparoscopy in selected patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of hemodynamically trauma patients who underwent laparoscopic management in a tertiary center in Brazil due to abdominal trauma. Patients were identified by searching through the institutional database. We collected demographic and clinical data, focusing on avoidance of exploratory laparotomy, and missed injury rate, morbidity, and length of stay. Categorical data were analyzed using Chi-square, while numerical comparisons were performed using Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis test.

RESULTS

We evaluated 165 cases, of which 9.7% needed conversion to an exploratory laparotomy. One-hundred and twenty-one patients (73%) had at least one intrabdominal injury. Two missed injuries to retroperitoneal organs were identified (1.2%), of which only one was clinically relevant. Three patients died (1.8%), one of which was due to complications from an intestinal injury after conversion. No deaths were related to the laparoscopic approach.

CONCLUSION

In selected hemodynamically stable trauma patients, the laparoscopic approach is feasible and safe, and reduces the need for exploratory laparotomy and its associated complications.

Management of complicated diaphragmatic hernia in the acute setting: a WSES position paper

BACKGROUND

Diaphragmatic hernia (DH) presenting acutely can be a potentially life-threatening condition. Its management continues to be debatable.

METHODS

A bibliographic search using major databases was performed using the terms "emergency surgery" "diaphragmatic hernia," "traumatic diaphragmatic rupture" and "congenital diaphragmatic hernia." GRADE methodology was used to evaluate the evidence and give recommendations.

RESULTS

CT scan of the chest and abdomen is the diagnostic gold standard to evaluate complicated DH. Appropriate preoperative assessment and prompt surgical intervention are important for a clinical success. Complicated DH repair is best performed via the use of biological and bioabsorbable meshes which have proven to reduce recurrence. The laparoscopic approach is the preferred technique in hemodynamically stable patients without significant comorbidities because it facilitates early diagnosis of small diaphragmatic injuries from traumatic wounds in the thoraco-abdominal area and reduces postoperative complications. Open surgery should be reserved for situations when skills and equipment for laparoscopy are not available, where exploratory laparotomy is needed, or if the patient is hemodynamically unstable. Damage Control Surgery is an option in the management of critical and unstable patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Complicated diaphragmatic hernia is a rare life-threatening condition. CT scan of the chest and abdomen is the gold standard for diagnosing the diaphragmatic hernia. Laparoscopic repair is the best treatment option for stable patients with complicated diaphragmatic hernias. Open repair is considered necessary in majority of unstable patients in whom Damage Control Surgery can be life-saving.

Possible Advantages of Minimal-Invasive Approaches in Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Nationwide Analysis

(1) Background: Laparoscopic resection for colon and rectal cancer was introduced in the early 1990s; the aim of this analysis was to show possible advantages of minimal-invasive approaches in rectal cancer surgery. (2) Methods: From 2016 to 2020, all patients undergoing open, laparoscopic or robotic-assisted rectal cancer surgery in Germany were retrospectively analyzed regarding sex distribution, conversion rates and in-hospital mortality rates according to nationwide hospital billing data based on diagnosis-related groups (DRGs). (3) Results: In total, 68,112 patients were analyzed, and most commonly, low anterior rectal resections with primary anastomosis (n = 25,824) were performed with an increase of minimal-invasive procedures over the years (open: 51% to 27%; laparoscopic: 47% to 63% and robotic: 2% to 10%). In-hospital mortality rate was 2.95% (n = 2012). In total, 4.61%, 1.77%, 1.14% and 3.95% of patients with open, laparoscopic, robotic and converted-to-open surgery died during hospital stay, respectively (open vs. laparoscopic p < 0.0001; open vs. robotic p < 0.00001; laparoscopic vs. robotic p = 0.001). Conversion rates were significantly more favorable in the robotic compared to the laparoscopic group. (11.94% vs. 2.53%; p < 0.0001). (4) Conclusion: Minimal-invasive rectal cancer surgery might have some advantages in terms of a reduced in-hospital mortality, and an improved conversion rate for the robotic approach.

New Robotic Platforms in General Surgery: What's the Current Clinical Scenario?

Background and Objectives: Robotic surgery has been widely adopted in general surgery worldwide but access to this technology is still limited to a few hospitals. With the recent introduction of new robotic platforms, several studies reported the feasibility of different surgical procedures. The aim of this systematic review is to highlight the current clinical practice with the new robotic platforms in general surgery. Materials and Methods: A grey literature search was performed on the Internet to identify the available robotic systems. A PRISMA compliant systematic review was conducted for all English articles up to 10 February 2023 searching the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Clinical outcomes, training process, operating surgeon background, cost-analysis, and specific registries were evaluated. Results: A total of 103 studies were included for qualitative synthesis after the full-text screening. Of the fifteen robotic platforms identified, only seven were adopted in a clinical environment. Out of 4053 patients, 2819 were operated on with a new robotic device. Hepatopancreatobiliary surgery specialty performed the majority of procedures, and the most performed procedure was cholecystectomy. Globally, 109 emergency surgeries were reported. Concerning the training process, only 45 papers reported the background of the operating surgeon, and only 28 papers described the training process on the surgical platform. Only one cost-analysis compared a new robot to the existing reference. Two manufacturers promoted a specific registry to collect clinical outcomes. Conclusions: This systematic review highlights the feasibility of most surgical procedures in general surgery using the new robotic platforms. Adoption of these new devices in general surgery is constantly growing with the extension of regulatory approvals. Standardization of the training process and the assessment of skills' transferability is still lacking. Further studies are required to better understand the real clinical and economical benefit.

Robotic Surgery: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature and Current Trends

Robotic surgery (RS) is an evolution of minimally invasive surgery that combines medical science, robotics, and engineering. The first robots approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) were the Da Vinci Surgical System and the ZEUS Robotic Surgical System, which have been improving over time. Through the decades, the equipment applied to RS had undergone a wide transformation as a response to the development of new techniques and facilities for the assembly and implementation of the own. RS has revolutionized the field of urology, enabling surgeons to perform complex procedures with greater precision and accuracy, and many other surgical specialties such as gynecology, general surgery, otolaryngology, cardiothoracic surgery, and neurosurgery. Several benefits, such as a better approach to the surgical site, a three-dimensional image that improves depth perception, and smaller scars, enhance range of motion, allowing the surgeon to conduct more complicated surgical operations, and reduced postoperative complications have made robotic-assisted surgery an increasingly popular approach. However, some points like the cost of surgical procedures, equipment-instrument, and maintenance are important aspects to consider. Machine learning will likely have a role to play in surgical training shortly through "automated performance metrics," where algorithms observe and "learn" individual surgeons' techniques, assess performance, and anticipate surgical outcomes with the potential to individualize surgical training and aid decision-making in real time.

Robotic Interventional Neuroradiology: Progress, Challenges, and Future Prospects

Advances in robotic technology have improved standard techniques in numerous surgical and endovascular specialties, offering more precision, control, and better patient outcomes. Robotic-assisted interventional neuroradiology is an emerging field at the intersection of interventional neuroradiology and biomedical robotics. Endovascular robotics can automate maneuvers to reduce procedure times and increase its safety, reduce occupational hazards associated with ionizing radiations, and expand networks of care to reduce gaps in geographic access to neurointerventions. To date, many robotic neurointerventional procedures have been successfully performed, including cerebral angiography, intracranial aneurysm embolization, carotid stenting, and epistaxis embolization. This review aims to provide a survey of the state of the art in robotic-assisted interventional neuroradiology, consider their technical and adoption limitations, and explore future developments critical for the widespread adoption of robotic-assisted neurointerventions.

Robotic colorectal surgery in the emergent diverticulitis setting: is it safe? A review of large national database

BACKGROUND

As robotic colorectal surgery continues to advance in conjunction with improved recovery protocols, we began implementing robotic surgery (RS) as an option for emergent diverticulitis surgery. Our hospital system utilizes the Da Vinci Xi system, and staff are required to undergo training, making emergent colorectal surgery a feasible option. However, it is essential to determine the safety with reproducibility of our experiences.

METHODS

A de-identified retrospective review was performed of Intuitive's national database which obtained data from 262 facilities from January 2018 through December 2021. This identified over 22,000 emergent colorectal surgeries. Of those, over 2500 were performed for diverticulitis in which 126 were RS, 446 laparoscopic surgery (LS), and 1952 open surgery (OS). Clinical outcome metrics including conversion rates, anastomotic leaks, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, length of stay, mortality, and readmissions were obtained. The cohort was defined by patients who were seen in the emergency department (ED) with diverticulitis and proceeded to have a sigmoid colectomy within 24 h of ED arrival.

RESULTS

RS was associated with increased operating time (RS 262, LS 207, OS 182 min), but data has shown many benefits of emergent RS compared to OS. We identified significant decreases in ICU admission rates (OS 19.0%, RS 9.5%, p = 0.01) and anastomotic leak rates (OS 4.4%, RS 0.8%, p = 0.04), with borderline improvement in overall length of stay (OS 9.9, RS 8.9 days, p = 0.05). When compared with LS, RS showed many comparable results. However, RS witnessed a statistically significant improvement in anastomotic leak rates (LS 4.5%, RS 0.8%, p = 0.04). Importantly, there was a striking difference in conversion rates to OS. LS converted over 28.7% of cases to OS, whereas RS only converted 7.9%, p = 0.000005.

CONCLUSION

Given these findings, RS is another MIS tool that could be a safe and feasible option for the acute management of emergent diverticulitis.

Lessons Learned from Natural Disasters around Digital Health Technologies and Delivering Quality Healthcare

As climate change drives increased intensity, duration and severity of weather-related events that can lead to natural disasters and mass casualties, innovative approaches are needed to develop climate-resilient healthcare systems that can deliver safe, quality healthcare under non-optimal conditions, especially in remote or underserved areas. Digital health technologies are touted as a potential contributor to healthcare climate change adaptation and mitigation, through improved access to healthcare, reduced inefficiencies, reduced costs, and increased portability of patient information. Under normal operating conditions, these systems are employed to deliver personalised healthcare and better patient and consumer involvement in their health and well-being. During the COVID-19 pandemic, digital health technologies were rapidly implemented on a mass scale in many settings to deliver healthcare in compliance with public health interventions, including lockdowns. However, the resilience and effectiveness of digital health technologies in the face of the increasing frequency and severity of natural disasters remain to be determined. In this review, using the mixed-methods review methodology, we seek to map what is known about digital health resilience in the context of natural disasters using case studies to demonstrate what works and what does not and to propose future directions to build climate-resilient digital health interventions.

Training curriculum in minimally invasive emergency digestive surgery: 2022 WSES position paper

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS), including laparoscopic and robotic approaches, is widely adopted in elective digestive surgery, but selectively used for surgical emergencies. The present position paper summarizes the available evidence concerning the learning curve to achieve proficiency in emergency MIS and provides five expert opinion statements, which may form the basis for developing standardized curricula and training programs in emergency MIS.

METHODS

This position paper was conducted according to the World Society of Emergency Surgery methodology. A steering committee and an international expert panel were involved in the critical appraisal of the literature and the development of the consensus statements.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies regarding the learning curve in emergency MIS were selected. All but one study considered laparoscopic appendectomy. Only one study reported on emergency robotic surgery. In most of the studies, proficiency was achieved after an average of 30 procedures (range: 20-107) depending on the initial surgeon's experience. High heterogeneity was noted in the way the learning curve was assessed. The experts claim that further studies investigating learning curve processes in emergency MIS are needed. The emergency surgeon curriculum should include a progressive and adequate training based on simulation, supervised clinical practice (proctoring), and surgical fellowships. The results should be evaluated by adopting a credentialing system to ensure quality standards. Surgical proficiency should be maintained with a minimum caseload and constantly evaluated. Moreover, the training process should involve the entire surgical team to facilitate the surgeon's proficiency.

CONCLUSIONS

Limited evidence exists concerning the learning process in laparoscopic and robotic emergency surgery. The proposed statements should be seen as a preliminary guide for the surgical community while stressing the need for further research.

Robotic-assisted resection of proximal jejunal ischemic stricture and intracorporeal robot-sewn anastomosis

With the advent of robotic surgery as an effective means of minimally invasive surgery in the last decade, more and more surgeries are being performed robotically in today's world. Robotic surgery has several advantages over conventional laparoscopic surgery, such as three-dimensional vision with depth perception, magnified view, tremor filtration, and, more importantly, degrees of freedom of the articulating instruments. While the literature is abundant on robotic cholecystectomy and highly complex hepatobiliary surgeries, there is hardly any literature on robotic small bowel resection with intracorporeal anastomosis. We present a case of a 50-year-old male patient with a symptomatic proximal jejunal ischemic stricture who underwent robotic-assisted resection and robot-sewn intracorporeal anastomosis in two layers. He did well in the postoperative period and was discharged on postoperative day 4 with uneventful recovery. We hereby discuss the advantages and disadvantages of robotic surgery in such a scenario with a review of the literature.

Global trends and hotspots in research of robotic surgery in oncology: A bibliometric and visual analysis from 2002 to 2021

BACKGROUND

With the development of robotic surgery in the field of oncology, an increasing number of relevant research papers have been published. In order to explore the research hotspots and trends in this field, a bibliometric and visual analysis was performed for the first time.

METHODS

The literature records related to oncology robotic surgery were obtained from the Web of Science Core Collection database and imported into the software VOSviewer 1.6.18, CiteSpace 6.1.R3, and the Bibliometric Online Analysis Platform for analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 6,964 publications, including 5,635 articles and 1,329 reviews, were included in this study. Over the past 20 years, annual publications and citations have experienced rapid growth, particularly in the last two years. The United States was the country with the most publications, while Yonsei University in South Korea was the most productive institution. The Journal of Robotic Surgery and the Journal of Urology were the journals with the most publications and citations, respectively. Mottrie A from Belgium and Ficarra V from Italy were the authors with the highest number of publications and citations, respectively. The keywords "robotic surgical procedure", "laparoscopic surgery", "prostate cancer", "colorectal cancer", "gastric cancer", "resection", "complications classification", "open surgery", "transoral robotic surgery", "pathological outcomes", and "robot-assisted surgery" reflect the research hotspots and trends of oncology robotic surgery.

CONCLUSION

The therapeutic advantages of robotic surgery in oncology are not yet prominent, and further randomized controlled trials with multicenter and large samples are needed to evaluate the advantages of robotic surgery compared with laparoscopic surgery and open surgery in the treatment of tumors from multiple outcome indicators.

Predictors of morbidity in revisional bariatric surgery and bariatric emergencies at an MBSAQIP-accredited community hospital

Introduction

Bariatric surgery revisions and emergencies are associated with higher morbidity and mortality compared to primary bariatric surgery. No formal outcome benchmarks exist that distinguish MBSAQIP-accredited centers in the community from unaccredited institutions.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted on 53 bariatric surgery revisions and 61 bariatric surgical emergencies by a single surgeon at a high-volume community hospital accredited program from 2018 to 2020. Primary outcomes were complications or deaths occurring within 30-days of the index procedure. Secondary outcomes included operative time, leaks, surgical site occurrences (SSOs), and deep surgical site infections.

Results

There were no significant differences in the demographic characteristics of the study groups. Mean operative time was significantly longer for revisions as compared to emergency operations (149.5 vs. 89.4 min). Emergencies had higher surgical site infection (5.7% vs. 21.3%, p < 0.05) and surgical site occurrence (SSO) (1.9% vs. 29.5%, p < 0.05) rates compared to revisions. Logistic regression analysis identified several factors to be predictive of increased risk of morbidity: pre-operative albumin < 3.5 g/dL (p < 0.05), recent bariatric procedure within the last 30 days (p < 0.05), prior revisional bariatric surgery (p < 0.05), prior duodenal switch (p < 0.05), and pre-operative COPD (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Bariatric surgery revisions and emergencies have similar morbidity and mortality, far exceeding those of the primary operation. Outcomes comparable to those reported by urban academic centers can be achieved in community hospital MBSAQIP-accredited centers.

Operative management of acute abdomen after bariatric surgery in the emergency setting: the OBA guidelines

BACKGROUND

Patients presenting with acute abdominal pain that occurs after months or years following bariatric surgery may present for assessment and management in the local emergency units. Due to the large variety of surgical bariatric techniques, emergency surgeons have to be aware of the main functional outcomes and long-term surgical complications following the most performed bariatric surgical procedures. The purpose of these evidence-based guidelines is to present a consensus position from members of the WSES in collaboration with IFSO bariatric experienced surgeons, on the management of acute abdomen after bariatric surgery focusing on long-term complications in patients who have undergone laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

METHOD

A working group of experienced general, acute care, and bariatric surgeons was created to carry out a systematic review of the literature following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) and to answer the PICO questions formulated after the Operative management in bariatric acute abdomen survey. The literature search was limited to late/long-term complications following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

CONCLUSIONS

The acute abdomen after bariatric surgery is a common cause of admission in emergency departments. Knowledge of the most common late/long-term complications (&gt; 4 weeks after surgical procedure) following sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and their anatomy leads to a focused management in the emergency setting with good outcomes and decreased morbidity and mortality rates. A close collaboration between emergency surgeons, radiologists, endoscopists, and anesthesiologists is mandatory in the management of this group of patients in the emergency setting.

Antimicrobial Challenge in Acute Care Surgery

The burden of infections in acute care surgery (ACS) is huge. Surgical emergencies alone account for three million admissions per year in the United States (US) with estimated financial costs of USD 28 billion per year. Acute care facilities and ACS patients represent boost sanctuaries for the emergence, development and transmission of infections and multi-resistant organisms. According to the World Health Organization, healthcare-associated infections affected around 4 million cases in Europe and 1.7 million in the US alone in 2011 with 39,000 and 99,000 directly attributable deaths, respectively. In this scenario, antimicrobial resistance arose as a public-health emergency that worsens patients’ morbidity and mortality and increases healthcare costs. The optimal patient care requires the application of comprehensive evidence-based policies and strategies aiming at minimizing the impact of healthcare associated infections and antimicrobial resistance, while optimizing the treatment of intra-abdominal infections. The present review provides a snapshot of two hot topics, such as antimicrobial resistance and systemic inflammatory response, and three milestones of infection management, such as source control, infection prevention, and control and antimicrobial stewardship.

Safety of robotic surgical management of non-elective colectomies for diverticulitis compared to laparoscopic surgery

Non-elective minimally invasive surgery (MIS) remains controversial, with minimal focus on robotics. This study aims to evaluate the short-term outcomes for non-elective robotic colectomies for diverticulitis. All colectomies for diverticulitis in ACS-NSQIP between 2012 and 2019 were identified by CPT and diagnosis codes. Open and elective cases were excluded. Patients with disseminated cancer, ascites, and ventilator-dependence were excluded. Procedures were grouped by approach (laparoscopic and robotic). Demographics, operative variables, and postoperative outcomes were compared between groups. Covariates with p < .1 were entered into multivariable logistic regression models for 30 day mortality, postoperative septic shock and reoperation. 6880 colectomies were evaluated (Laparoscopic = 6583, Robotic = 297). The laparoscopic group included more preoperative sepsis (31.6% vs. 10.8%), emergency cases (32.3% vs. 6.7%), and grade 3/4 wound classifications (53.3% vs. 42.8%). There was no difference in mortality, anastomotic leak, SSI, reoperation, readmission, or length of stay. The laparoscopic group had more postoperative sepsis (p = 0.001) and the robotic group showed increased bleeding (p = 0.011). In a multivariate regression model, increased age (OR = 1.083, p < 0.001), COPD (OR = 2.667, p = 0.007), dependent functional status (OR = 2.657, p = 0.021), dialysis (OR = 4.074, p = 0.016), preoperative transfusions (OR = 3.182, p = 0.019), emergency status (OR = 2.241, p = 0.010), higher ASA classification (OR = 3.170, p = 0.035), abnormal WBC (OR = 1.883, p = 0.046) were independent predictors for mortality. When controlling for confounders, robotic approach was not statistically significantly associated with septic shock or reoperation. When controlling for confounders, robotic approach was not a predictor for mortality, reoperation or septic shock. Robotic surgery is a feasible option for the acute management of diverticulitis.

Robotic operations in urgent general surgery: a systematic review

Robotically assisted operations are the state of the art in laparoscopic general surgery. They are established predominantly for elective operations. Since laparoscopy is widely used in urgent general surgery, the significance of robotic assistance in urgent operations is of interest. Currently, there are few data on robotic-assisted operations in urgent surgery. The aim of this study was to collect and classify the existing studies. A two-stage, PRISMA-compliant literature search of PubMed and the Cochrane Library was conducted. We analyzed all articles on robotic surgery associated with urgent general surgery resp. acute surgical diseases of the abdomen. Gynecological and urological diseases so as vascular surgery, except mesenterial ischemia, were excluded. Studies and case reports/series published between 1980 and 2021 were eligible for inclusion. In addition to a descriptive synopsis, various outcome parameters were systematically recorded. Fifty-two studies of operations for acute appendicitis and cholecystitis, hernias and acute conditions of the gastrointestinal tract were included. The level of evidence is low. Surgical robots in the narrow sense and robotic camera mounts were used. All narrow-sense robots are nonautonomous systems; in 82%, the Da Vinci^® system was used. The most frequently published emergency operations were urgent cholecystectomies (30 studies, 703 patients) followed by incarcerated hernias (9 studies, 199 patients). Feasibility of robotic operations was demonstrated for all indications. Neither robotic-specific problems nor extensive complication rates were reported. Various urgent operations in general surgery can be performed robotically without increased risk. The available data do not allow a final evidence-based assessment.

Current Status of Robot-Assisted Revisional Bariatric Surgery

Bariatric surgery has been demonstrated to be effective in achieving significant weight loss and remission of obesity-related comorbidities. However, a percentage of patients fail to lose enough weight, regain weight, or experience postoperative complications, requiring additional interventions. Revisional bariatric surgeries (RBS) involve the wide spectrum of procedures that aim to treat complications of the index operation or achieve further weight loss. These are technically challenging procedures due to adhesions of the internal organs, reduced working space, and a distorted anatomy. Indications, timing, and type of operation for RBS are not standardized, and there is no consensus on the best surgical approach. Some authors claim a robotic platform could be advantageous in these types of procedures that are performed in reduced, deep operating fields, or those requiring precision and accuracy. This review examines the most current and representative literature on the outcomes of robot-assisted RBS. Included studies demonstrate the safety and feasibility of the robotic approach for RBS. However, long operative times and high costs remain major drawbacks of the device. Finally, if we consider that many centers have not yet completed the learning curve for robot-assisted RBS, the potential for improved outcomes seems promising.