Laparoscopic versus robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: lessons and long-term follow-up learned from a large prospective monocentric study.

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) has become the procedure of choice for the treatment of morbid obesity. Recently, several reports have shown the potential advantages of the robotic approach, notably by reducing complications. The aim of this study is to report our long-term experience with robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and to compare outcomes with the laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

From January 2003 to September 2013, 777 consecutive minimally invasive RYGB have been performed in our institution: 389 laparoscopically (50.1 %) and 388 robotically (49.9 %). During the study period, all the data regarding these consecutive RYGB has been prospectively collected in a dedicated database.

RESULTS

While longer in duration compared to laparoscopy (+30 min; p=0.0001), the robotic approach had a lower conversion rate (0.8 vs. 4.9 %; p=0.0007), and less complications (11.6 % vs. 16.7 %; p=0.05), in particular, less gastrointestinal leaks (0.3 vs. 3.6 %; p=0.0009). There were also less early reoperations (1 vs. 3.3 %; p=0.05) and a shorter hospital stay in the robotic group (6.2 vs. 10.4 days; p=0.0001). There were no statistical differences between the early and the current robotic experience, except in operative time and hospital stay, which were shorter for the last 100 cases. Finally, the BMI loss was significantly higher in the laparoscopic group starting at the first post-operative year.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic RYGB is not only safe and feasible, but also a valid option in comparison to laparoscopy. At the cost of a longer operative time, we observed better short-term outcomes with the robotic approach.