University Hospital Cleveland Medical Center/Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Jan Kochanowski University, Kielce, Poland.
Obes Surg. 2018 Sep;28(9):2589-2596. doi: 10.1007/s11695-018-3228-6.
The aim was to compare clinical outcomes of patients treated with totally robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (TRRYGB) with those treated with the different laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) techniques. The clinical benefit of the robotic approach to bariatric surgery compared to the standard laparoscopic approach is unclear. There are no studies directly comparing outcomes of TRRYGB with different LRYGB techniques.
Outcomes of 578 obese patients who underwent RYGB between 2011 and 2014 at an academic center were assessed. Multivariable analysis and propensity matching were used for comparing TRRYGB to different LRYGB techniques, including 21-mm EEA circular-stapled gastrojejunal anastomosis (GJA, LRYGB-21CS), linear-stapled GJA (LRYGB-LS), and hand-sewn GJA (LRYGB-HS).
The TRRYGB technique required a longer mean operative time compared to the other groups, respectively 204 ± 46 vs. 139 ± 30 min (LRYGB-21CS), 206 ± 37 vs. 158 ± 30 min (LRYGB-LS), and 210 ± 36 vs. 167 ± 30 min (LRYGB-HS). TRRYGB experienced a lower stricture rate (2 vs. 17%, P = 0.003), shorter hospital stay (2.6 ± 1.2 vs. 4.3 ± 5.5 days, P = 0.008), and lower readmission rate (12 vs. 28%, P = 0.009). No significant differences in outcomes were observed when comparing RRYGB to LRYGB-LS or LRYGB-HS.
TRRYGB increases operative time compared to all LRYGB techniques. TRRYGB was superior to LRYGB-21CS in terms of significantly shorter hospital stay, lower readmission rate, and less frequent GJA stricture formation. TRRYGB provides no clinical advantages over the LRYGB-LS and LRYGB-HS techniques.
比较完全机器人 Roux-en-Y 胃旁路术(TRRYGB)与不同腹腔镜 Roux-en-Y 胃旁路术(LRYGB)治疗患者的临床结果。机器人减重手术相对于标准腹腔镜手术的临床优势尚不清楚。目前尚无研究直接比较 TRRYGB 与不同 LRYGB 技术的结果。
评估了 2011 年至 2014 年在学术中心接受 RYGB 的 578 例肥胖患者的结果。采用多变量分析和倾向匹配比较 TRRYGB 与不同的 LRYGB 技术,包括 21mm EEA 圆形吻合环胃肠吻合术(GJA,LRYGB-21CS)、线性吻合环 GJA(LRYGB-LS)和手工 GJA(LRYGB-HS)。
与其他组相比,TRRYGB 技术的平均手术时间更长,分别为 204±46 分钟比 139±30 分钟(LRYGB-21CS)、206±37 分钟比 158±30 分钟(LRYGB-LS)和 210±36 分钟比 167±30 分钟(LRYGB-HS)。TRRYGB 的狭窄发生率较低(2%比 17%,P=0.003),住院时间较短(2.6±1.2 天比 4.3±5.5 天,P=0.008),再入院率较低(12%比 28%,P=0.009)。与 LRYGB-LS 或 LRYGB-HS 相比,RRYGB 之间的结果无显著差异。
与所有 LRYGB 技术相比,TRRYGB 增加了手术时间。在住院时间较短、再入院率较低、GJA 狭窄发生率较低方面,TRRYGB 优于 LRYGB-21CS。与 LRYGB-LS 和 LRYGB-HS 技术相比,TRRYGB 无临床优势。