Economopoulos Konstantinos P, Theocharidis Vasileios, McKenzie Travis J, Sergentanis Theodoros N, Psaltopoulou Theodora
Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 101 Merrimack Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Society of Junior Doctors, Athens, Greece.
Obes Surg. 2015 Nov;25(11):2180-9. doi: 10.1007/s11695-015-1870-9.
We aim to summarize the available literature on patients treated with robotic RYGB and compare the clinical outcomes of patients treated with robotic RYGB with those treated with the standard laparoscopic RYGB. A systematic literature search of PubMed and Scopus databases was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Fourteen comparative and 11 non-comparative studies were included in this study, reporting data on 5145 patients. This study points to comparable clinical outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic RYGB. Robotic-assisted RYGB was associated with significantly less frequent anastomotic stricture events, reoperations, and a decreased length of hospital stay compared with the standard laparoscopic procedures; however, these findings should be interpreted with caution given the low number and poor quality of the studies currently available in the literature.
我们旨在总结有关接受机器人Roux-en-Y胃旁路术（RYGB）治疗患者的现有文献，并比较接受机器人RYGB治疗的患者与接受标准腹腔镜RYGB治疗的患者的临床结局。根据PRISMA指南，对PubMed和Scopus数据库进行了系统的文献检索。本研究纳入了14项比较性研究和11项非比较性研究，报告了5145例患者的数据。本研究表明机器人和腹腔镜RYGB的临床结局具有可比性。与标准腹腔镜手术相比，机器人辅助RYGB的吻合口狭窄事件、再次手术频率显著降低，住院时间缩短；然而，鉴于目前文献中现有研究数量少且质量差，这些发现应谨慎解读。
