Temporal and institutional trends in robotic surgery.

Robotic surgery has become increasingly prevalent in general surgery practice. While previous studies have shown the safety and efficacy of robotic assistance in laparoscopic general surgery procedures, few studies have evaluated the temporal and regional trends in implementation. In our retrospective population-based study, we aim to evaluate the national trends in robotic surgery. National Inpatient Database (NIS 2009-2014) was used to identify adults who underwent robotic assisted surgery (ICD 9 codes 17.41 to 17.49). Robotic procedures related to seven abdominal organ systems were compared against the trends of Urology, Gynaecologic, and Orthopedic robotic procedures. Discharge weights were applied to calculate National temporal trends separated by hospital size, teaching status and US geographic region. 894,163 patients received a robotic assisted procedure between 2009 and 2014 with 64% increase in utilization. The largest percent change was witnessed in biliary robotic procedures with 2984% change in utilization, followed by hernia (1376%). Lowest percent change was witnessed in esophageal procedures with 114% increase. Medium sized hospitals had the largest change in robotic utilization (41%), with large institutions seeing 18% decrease. Gastric procedures were the most common robotic procedure performed at small institutions (7917 total cases; 316%). Large institutions saw an overall decrease in gastric (- 47%), esophageal (- 17%), small and large intestinal (-16%), and hepatic (- 7%) robotic procedures. Rural non-teaching hospitals saw the largest increase in robotic surgery (274%). Urban non-teaching hospitals saw a decrease of 29%. While urban teaching institutions saw a 20% and 6% increase in gynecological and urological procedures, an overall decrease was seen in esophageal (- 10%), gastric (- 12%), intestinal (- 11%), hepatic (- 17%), biliary (- 10%), pancreatic (- 11%) and hernia procedures (- 14%). Biliary procedures saw the largest increase in rural institutions (740 cases; 392%), followed by hernia (144% increase). South region of the nation had the largest increase in robotic procedures (23%). No change was seen in the use of robotic surgery in the northeast region with the midwest and west seeing an overall decrease (- 4% and - 22%, respectively). Our study highlights the increase in use of robotics for both general and specialty surgery, with an increase in utilization over time. Increased incidence of robotic surgery in smaller, rural institutions with overall decrease in larger, urban teaching hospitals suggests increasing comfort in robotic surgery in the community setting. Further studies are necessary to evaluate the factors associated with increased utilization in smaller institutions.

The current status and global trends of clinical trials related to robotic surgery: a bibliometric and visualized study.

Conducting clinical trials can evaluate the effectiveness and safety of surgical robots. To promote the advancement of academic robotic programs in surgery, this study captures the development trend and research hotspots of clinical trials related to surgical robots by bibliometric analysis. Bibliometrix package in R software was used to analyze the publication year, authors, countries, institutes, and journals. The visualization maps of keywords were formed using VOSviewer. The keywords with the strongest citation bursts and the institutional collaboration map were created by CiteSpace. Urology dominates with 31.3% of publications and the controlled clinical trials in urology and orthopedic accounted for the highest proportion, reaching 73%. North America, the USA, and Seoul National University lead in productivity. The most productive country, region and institution are North America, USA and Seoul National University, respectively. The trend of collaboration is regional instead of international. Keyword and burst keyword analysis revealed a primary focus in clinical research on robotic surgery: evaluating process improvements, comparing robotic and traditional surgery, and assessing feasibility. Long-term clinical trials assess surgical robots not only intraoperative performance but also postoperative complications and overall surgical outcomes. The development in the field is unbalanced between regions and countries. To promote multi-center clinical trials, governments can streamline review procedures and establish international consensus review standards, while academic institutions can form academic alliances. Also, the study offers recommendations for the development of academic robotic programs and regional collaboration units in robotic surgery, which may provide researchers with a strong reference for future research.

Knowledge, attitude, and perception of robotic-assisted surgery among the general population in Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional study.

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has revolutionized surgical practices, with robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) significantly advancing. However, the understanding and acceptance of RAS vary, impacting its widespread adoption. This study aims to assess Saudi Arabians' attitudes and comprehension of RAS, which is crucial for promoting its integration into surgical procedures. A cross-sectional study was conducted in various Saudi Arabian cities. A total of 1449 participants were included, while participants with cognitive issues were excluded. Demographic information, knowledge, technology experience, attitudes, and perceptions about RAS were collected using an online self-administered questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Of the participants, 51.1% demonstrated awareness of RAS, mainly through social media (36.9%). Factors influencing awareness included gender, education, income, occupation, computer literacy, and technology comfort. Gender disparities were evident in attitudes and perceptions toward RAS. Concerns about RAS included robot malfunction (62.0%), surgical errors (45.4%), and surgeon competency (44.7%). 36.4% of the participants believe RAS is faster, 29.9% believe RAS is less painful, and 25.3% believe RAS has fewer complications. Positive perceptions encompassed the belief that robot-using surgeons are more skilled (44.5%) and hospitals offering RAS are better (54.3%). Notably, 47.7% expressed willingness to consider RAS as a treatment option. The study underscores the significance of promoting awareness and informed decisions to ensure the successful integration of RAS in surgical practices. Addressing concerns and misconceptions and enhancing public comprehension are pivotal for facilitating informed decision-making and fostering RAS acceptance within Saudi Arabia's surgical landscape.

Video-Assisted vs Robotic-Assisted Lung Lobectomies for Operating Room Resource Utilization and Patient Outcomes.

Importance: With increased use of robots, there is an inadequate understanding of minimally invasive modalities' time costs. This study evaluates the operative durations of robotic-assisted vs video-assisted lung lobectomies. Objective: To compare resource utilization, specifically operative time, between video-assisted and robotic-assisted thoracoscopic lung lobectomies. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study evaluated patients aged 18 to 90 years who underwent minimally invasive (robotic-assisted or video-assisted) lung lobectomy from January 1, 2020, to December 31, 2022, with 90 days' follow-up after surgery. The study included multicenter electronic health record data from 21 hospitals within an integrated health care system in Northern California. Thoracic surgery was regionalized to 4 centers with 14 board-certified general thoracic surgeons. Exposures: Robotic-assisted or video-assisted lung lobectomy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was operative duration (cut to close) in minutes. Secondary outcomes were length of stay, 30-day readmission, and 90-day mortality. Comparisons between video-assisted and robotic-assisted lobectomies were generated using the Wilcoxon rank sum test for continuous variables and the χ2 test for categorical variables. The average treatment effects were estimated with augmented inverse probability treatment weighting (AIPTW). Patient and surgeon covariates were adjusted for and included patient demographics, comorbidities, and case complexity (age, sex, race and ethnicity, neighborhood deprivation index, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index score, nonelective hospitalizations, emergency department visits, a validated laboratory derangement score, a validated institutional comorbidity score, a surgeon-designated complexity indicator, and a procedural code count), and a primary surgeon-specific indicator. Results: The study included 1088 patients (median age, 70.1 years [IQR, 63.3-75.8 years]; 704 [64.7%] female), of whom 446 (41.0%) underwent robotic-assisted and 642 (59.0%) underwent video-assisted lobectomy. The median unadjusted operative duration was 172.0 minutes (IQR, 128.0-226.0 minutes). After AIPTW, there was less than a 10% difference in all covariates between groups, and operative duration was a median 20.6 minutes (95% CI, 12.9-28.2 minutes; P < .001) longer for robotic-assisted compared with video-assisted lobectomies. There was no difference in adjusted secondary patient outcomes, specifically for length of stay (0.3 days; 95% CI, -0.3 to 0.8 days; P = .11) or risk of 30-day readmission (adjusted odds ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.84-1.98; P = .13). The unadjusted 90-day mortality rate (1.3% [n = 14]) was too low for the AIPTW modeling process. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, there was no difference in patient outcomes between modalities, but operative duration was longer in robotic-assisted compared with video-assisted lung lobectomy. Given that this elevated operative duration is additive when applied systematically, increased consideration of appropriate patient selection for robotic-assisted lung lobectomy is needed to improve resource utilization.

The impact of resident training on robotic operative times: is there a July Effect?

It is unknown whether the July Effect (a theory that medical errors and organizational inefficiencies increase during the influx of new surgical residents) exists in urologic robotic-assisted surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of urology resident training on robotic operative times at the beginning of the academic year. A retrospective chart review was conducted for urologic robotic surgeries performed at a single institution between 2008 and 2019. Univariate and multivariate mix model analyses were performed to determine the association between operative time and patient age, estimated blood loss, case complexity, robotic surgical system (Si or Xi), and time of the academic year. Differences in surgery time and non-surgery time were assessed with/without resident presence. Operative time intervals were included in the analysis. Resident presence correlated with increased surgery time (38.6 min (p < 0.001)) and decreased non-surgery time (4.6 min (p < 0.001)). Surgery time involving residents decreased by 8.7 min after 4 months into the academic year (July-October), and by an additional 5.1 min after the next 4 months (p = 0.027, < 0.001). When compared across case types stratified by complexity, surgery time for cases with residents significantly varied. Cases without residents did not demonstrate such variability. Resident presence was associated with prolonged surgery time, with the largest effect occurring in the first 4 months and shortening later in the year. However, resident presence was associated with significantly reduced non-surgery time. These results help to understand how new trainees impact operating room times.

Robotic ambulatory colorectal resections: a systematic review.

Colorectal surgery has progressed greatly via minimally invasive techniques, laparoscopic and robotic. With the advent of ERAS protocols, patient recovery times have greatly shortened, allowing for same day discharges (SDD). Although SDD have been explored through laparoscopic colectomy reviews, no reviews surrounding robotic ambulatory colorectal resections (RACrR) exist to date. A systematic search was carried out across three databases and internet searches. Data were selected and extracted by two independent reviewers. Inclusion criteria included robotic colorectal resections with a length of hospital stay of less than one day or 24 h. 4 studies comprising 136 patients were retrieved. 56% of patients were female and were aged between 21 and 89 years. Main surgery indications were colorectal cancer and recurrent sigmoid diverticulitis (43% each). Most patients had low anterior resections (48%). Overall, there was a 4% complication rate postoperatively, with only 1 patient requiring readmission due to postoperative urinary retention (< 1%). Patient selection criteria involved ASA score cut-offs, nutritional status, and specific health conditions. Protocols employed shared similarities including ERAS education, transabdominal plane blocks, early removal of urinary catheters, an opioid-sparing regime, and encouraged early oral intake and ambulation prior to discharge. All 4 studies had various follow-up methods involving telemedicine, face-to-face consultations, and virtual ward teams. RACrRs is safe and feasible in a highly specific patient population; however, further high-quality studies with larger sample sizes are needed to draw more significant conclusions. Several limitations included small sample size and the potential of recall bias due to retrospective nature of 2 studies.

A review of minimal access surgery provision and training within the United Kingdom.

When combined with healthcare pressures, the exponential growth of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has impacted UK-based training outcomes, including the learning curve to competency. Aim: To ascertain the current provision of RAS and investigate differences in access to minimal access surgical (MAS) facilities and training across the UK. A two-armed electronic survey was conducted. The first arm questioned clinical leads regarding robotic practice and future training provisions. The second investigated trainee and trainers' perceptions of MAS training and facilities. 64% (52/81) of responding trusts utilise a robotic system. The majority (68% [55/81]) have plans to expand or acquire a system within 3 years. 171 responses from 112 UK and Republic of Ireland hospitals were collected for Arm 2. Laparoscopic categories queried whether trainees had access to a formal curriculum, training days and sim-boxes. Most consultants (51.9%) and trainees (51.6%) reported that there was no formal local training curriculum for robotic surgery. Combined responses demonstrated 42.1% (n = 195/463) said "yes", 39.5% (n = 183) "no" and 18.4% (n = 85) "don't know". For combined robotic categories (simulation, training days and operative lists) 28.3% (n = 134/473) responded "yes", 51.6% (n = 244) said "no" and 20.1% (n = 95) said "don't know". This study provides insight into the current provision of robotic-assisted surgery at UK trusts and highlights the need to facilitate regular clinical training and equitable access to MAS simulation within a formal curriculum. This may aid regulation of training in parallel with the expansion of robotic practice and avoid a significant skill acquisition gap and risks to patient safety.

The impact of robotic rectal cancer surgery at a Canadian regional cancer centre: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although robotic surgery has several advantages over other minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques for rectal cancer surgery, the uptake in Canada has been limited owing to a perceived increase in cost and lack of training. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of access to robotic surgery in a Canadian setting. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study involving consecutive adults undergoing surgical resection for rectal cancer between 2017 and 2020. The primary exposure was access to robotic surgery. Outcomes included MIS utilization, short-term outcomes, total cost of care, and quality of surgical resection. We completed univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: We included 171 individuals in this cohort study (85 in the prerobotic period and 86 in the robotic period). The 2 groups had similar baseline characteristics. A higher proportion of individuals underwent successful MIS in the robotic phase (86% v. 46%, p < 0.001). Other benefits included a shorter mean length of hospital stay (5.1 d v. 9.2 d, p < 0.001). The quality of surgical resection was similar between groups. The total cost of care was $16 746 in the robotic period and $18 808 in the prerobotic period (mean difference -$1262, 95% confidence interval -$4308 to $1783; p = 0.4). CONCLUSION: Access to robotic rectal cancer surgery increased successful completion of MIS and shortened hospital stay, with a similar total cost of care. Robotic rectal cancer surgery can enhance patient outcomes in the Canadian setting.

Robotic-assisted hysterectomy for benign gynecologic disease in the United States: in-hospital use of opioid and non-opioid analgesics.

To compare the in-hospital opioid and non-opioid analgesic use among women who underwent robotic-assisted hysterectomy (RH) vs. open (OH), vaginal (VH), or laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH). Records of women in the United States who underwent hysterectomy for benign gynecologic disease were extracted from the Premier Healthcare Database (2013-2019). Propensity score methods were used to create three 1:1 matched cohorts stratified in inpatients [RH vs. OH (N = 16,821 pairs), RH vs. VH (N = 6149), RH vs. LH (N = 11,250)] and outpatients [RH vs. OH (N = 3139), RH vs. VH (N = 29,954), RH vs. LH (N = 85,040)]. Opioid doses were converted to morphine milligram equivalents (MME). Within matched cohorts, opioid and non-opioid analgesic use was compared. On the day of surgery, the percentage of patients who received opioids differed only for outpatients who underwent RH vs. LH or VH (maximum difference = 1%; p < 0.001). RH was associated with lower total doses of opioids in all matched cohorts (each p < 0.001), with the largest difference observed between RH and OH: median (IQR) of 47.5 (25.0-90.0) vs. 82.5 (36.0-137.0) MME among inpatients and 39.3 (19.5-66.0) vs. 60.0 (35.0-113.3) among outpatients. After the day of surgery, fewer inpatients who underwent RH received opioids vs. OH (78.7 vs. 87.5%; p < 0.001) or LH (78.6 vs. 80.6%; p < 0.001). The median MME was lower for RH (15.0; 7.5-33.5) versus OH (22.5; 15.0-55.0; p < 0.001). Minor differences were observed for non-opioid analgesics. RH was associated with lower in-hospital opioid use than OH, whereas the same magnitude of difference was not observed for RH vs. LH or VH.

A comparative analysis of robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy in octogenarians.

Old age is a predictor of increased morbidity following pancreatic operations. This study was undertaken to compare the peri-operative variables between robotic and 'open' pancreaticoduodenectomy, in octogenarians (≥ 80 years of age). Since 2012, with IRB approval, we retrospectively followed 69 patients, who underwent robotic (n = 42) and 'open' (n = 27) pancreaticoduodenectomy. Statistical analysis was performed using chi-square test and Student's t test. Data are presented as median(mean ± SD), and significance accepted with 95% probability. Patients who underwent the robotic approach had a greater Charlson Comorbidity Index [6 (6 ± 1.6) vs 5 (5 ± 1.0), (p = 0.01)] and previous abdominal operations [n = 24 (57%) vs n = 9 (33%), (p = 0.04)]. The robotic approach led to longer operative time [426 (434 ± 95.8) vs 240 (254 ± 71.1) minutes, (p < 0.0001)], decreased blood loss [200 (291 ± 289.2) vs 426 (434 ± 95.8) mL (p = 0.008)], and decreased intraoperative blood transfusions (p < 0.05). Patients who underwent robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy had comparable and at times superior outcomes, consistent with the literature regarding robotic and 'open' pancreaticoduodenectomy. This study indicates that robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy continues to offer same benefits for patients of advanced age and demonstrates age should not be a preclusion to robotic operations.

Operating room efficiency for a high-volume surgeon in simultaneous bilateral robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty: a prospective cohort study.

Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RATKA) has been shown to achieve more accurate component positioning and target alignment than conventional jig-based instrumentation; however, concerns remain regarding its adoption since it is associated with steep learning curves, higher operational costs, and increased surgical time. This study aims to compare the operating times of three cohorts of patients undergoing simultaneous bilateral TKA, i.e., first 50 RATKA, last 50 RATKA (at the end of 1 year), and 50 conventional TKA. This prospective cohort study was conducted at a single high-volume tertiary care center by a single experienced surgeon on 150 patients (300 knees), who were allotted into three equal cohorts of 50, between February 2020 and December 2021. Simultaneous bilateral TKAs were done in all three groups and operative times recorded. We describe the technique for optimizing the surgical time of SB-RATKA for efficient operative room logistics. The operating times of the two robotic-assisted TKA cohorts were compared with the operating times of the conventional SB-TKA cohort. The mean age of the study population was 59(±6.2) years with the majority of females (82%). The mean coronal deformity was comparable between the cohorts. The mean operating time in the conventional CTKA, initial 50 RATKA, and final 50 RATKA cohorts were 115.56 (±10.7), 127.8 (±26), and 91.66 (±13.5) min, respectively, all of which showed a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001). The mean operating times of the final 50 RATKA at the end of 1 year improved by about 36 min with all the SB-RATKA cases being completed in under 120 min. The efficiency of SB-RATKA improved significantly with time and experience, resulting in shorter operational times within a year, revealing the potential of robotic-assisted surgery to surpass conventional approaches in TKA in terms of operating room efficiency.

Exploring the feasibility of robotic liver resection in a limited resource setting.

The transition from open hepatectomy to minimally invasive techniques has reduced morbidity and mortality. However, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) requires substantial expertise. Robotic liver resection (RLR) combines minimal invasiveness with open surgical precision. It may facilitate complex procedures without the learning required for LLR. We evaluated RLR outcomes in a limited resource setting and assessed its efficacy and practicality. This retrospective study analyzed 67 robotic hepatectomies conducted from 2020 to 2023. Demographic, perioperative factors, and surgical outcomes were analyzed. Major hepatectomies were required in 46/67 (68.7%) patients who underwent RLR. No open conversions, 30-day mortalities, or readmissions occurred. Complications occurred in 7.4% of patients; major complications occurred in 5.9%. Learning curve analysis showed a negative correlation between operation sequence and operative time. Effective use of robotic technology combined with the expertise of well-trained surgeons facilitates successful execution of RLR with feasible surgical outcomes, even at smaller centers.

Efforts to improve the billing accuracy of robotic-assisted thoracic surgery through education, updated procedure cards, and electronic medical record system changes.

Precise medical billing is essential for decreasing hospital liability, upholding environmental stewardship and ensuring fair costs for patients. We instituted a multifaceted approach to improve the billing accuracy of our robotic-assisted thoracic surgery programme by including an educational component, updating procedure cards and removing the auto-populating function of our electronic medical record. Overall, we saw significant improvements in both the number of inaccurate billing cases and, specifically, the number of cases that overcharged patients.

Robotic thymectomy in thymic tumours: a multicentre, nation-wide study.

OBJECTIVES: Robotic thymectomy has been suggested and considered technically feasible for thymic tumours. However, because of small-sample series and the lack of data on long-term results, controversies still exist on surgical and oncological results with this approach. We performed a large national multicentre study sought to evaluate the early and long-term outcomes after robot-assisted thoracoscopic thymectomy in thymic epithelial tumours. METHODS: All patients with thymic epithelial tumours operated through a robotic thoracoscopic approach between 2002 and 2022 from 15 Italian centres were enrolled. Demographic characteristics, clinical, intraoperative, postoperative, pathological and follow-up data were retrospectively collected and reviewed. RESULTS: There were 669 patients (307 men and 362 women), 312 (46.6%) of whom had associated myasthenia gravis. Complete thymectomy was performed in 657 (98%) cases and in 57 (8.5%) patients resection of other structures was necessary, with a R0 resection in all but 9 patients (98.6%). Twenty-three patients (3.4%) needed open conversion, but no perioperative mortality occurred. Fifty-one patients (7.7%) had postoperative complications. The median diameter of tumour resected was 4 cm (interquartile range 3-5.5 cm), and Masaoka stage was stage I in 39.8% of patients, stage II in 56.1%, stage III in 3.5% and stage IV in 0.6%. Thymoma was observed in 90.2% of patients while thymic carcinoma occurred in 2.8% of cases. At the end of the follow-up, only 2 patients died for tumour-related causes. Five- and ten-year recurrence rates were 7.4% and 8.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Through the largest collection of robotic thymectomy for thymic epithelial tumours we demonstrated that robot-enhanced thoracoscopic thymectomy is a technically sound and safe procedure with a low complication rate and optimal oncological outcomes.

Retrospective analysis between total laparoscopic and vNOTES hysterectomy in obese patients: single-center study.

INTRODUCTION: Hysterectomy is one of the most common major gynecological surgeries, and it is performed for benign and malignant reasons. Currently, five types of hysterectomies are described: vaginal (VH), abdominal (AH), laparoscopic (LH), robotic, and vNOTES (vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery). This paper compares these two types of surgery in obese patients by analyzing the surgeries performed by our team. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The research was conducted from January 2022 to December 2023 at the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics of the General Hospital in Zadar. The study included female patients aged 18-75 years with a BMI > 30 kg/m2, regardless of parity, who were operated on for benign pathology. RESULTS: There were 24 patients included in total. One conversion was observed in the TLH group because of excessive bleeding. Median operative time (IQR) was significantly lower in the vNOTES group (p < 0.05) than in the TLH group 35 (10.9) vs 125 (74.0) min. CONCLUSION: The results concerning the duration of surgery, conversion rate, and postoperative bleeding and complications show that vNOTES hysterectomies seem to be feasible for obese patients. Further studies are needed to confirm these observations.

Enhancing surgical performance: the role of robotic surgery in myomectomies, a systematic review and metanalysis.

Examine the role, benefits, and limitations of robotic surgery in myomectomies compared to laparoscopic and open surgical approaches. This review sourced data from CENTRAL, Pubmed, Medline, and Embase up until May 1, 2023. Full articles comparing clinical outcomes of robotic myomectomy with open or laparoscopic procedures were included without language restriction. Initially, 2150 records were found. 24 studies were finally included for both qualitative and quantitative analyses. Two investigators independently assessed all reports following PRISMA guidelines. Meta-analysis was conducted using the software "Review Manager Version 5.4". Risk-of-bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Sensitivity analysis was conducted, when feasible. In a comparison between robotic and laparoscopic myomectomies, no significant difference was observed in fibroid weights and the size of the largest fibroid. Robotic myomectomy resulted in less blood loss, but transfusion rates were comparable. Both methods had similar complication rates and operative times, although some robotic studies showed longer durations. Conversion rates favored robotics. Hospital stays varied widely, with no overall significant difference, and pregnancy rates were similar between the two methods. When comparing robotic to open myomectomies, open procedures treated heavier and larger fibroids. They also had greater blood loss, but the robotic approach required fewer transfusions. The complication rate was slightly higher in open procedures. Open surgeries were generally faster, postoperative pain scores were similar, but hospital stays were longer for open procedures. Pregnancy rates were comparable for both robotic and open methods. Robotic surgery offers advancement in myomectomy procedures by offering enhanced exposure and dexterity, leading to reduced blood loss and improved patient outcomes. PROSPERO registration: CRD42023462348.

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.

Surgical and medical outcomes in robotic compared to laparoscopic colectomy global prospective cohort from the American college of surgeons national surgical quality improvement program.

BACKGROUND: Evidence regarding the outcomes benefits of robotic approach, when compared to a laparoscopic approach, in colectomy remain limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze the value of robotic approach compared to laparoscopic approach in minimally invasive colectomy. DESIGN: Cohort study of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP). SETTING: This study included data from the NSQIP from 1/2016 to 12/2021. PATIENT: Adult patients undergoing minimally invasive (laparoscopic or robotic) colorectal surgery. INTERVENTION: Robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy. OUTCOME MEASURES: Risk ratios for the incidence of medical and surgical morbidity and overall mortality. RESULTS: Compared to laparoscopic, robotic colectomy was associated with a significant decrease in postoperative morbidity [RR 0.84 (95%CI 0.72-0.96), P < 0.001], a significant reduction in postoperative mortality [RR 0.83 (95%CI 0.79-0.90), P 0.010)], and in post operative ileus [RR: 0.80 (95%CI 0.75-0.84), P < 0.001]. Yet, robotic approach was associated with a significant increase in total operative time despite a significant decrease in total length of stay. No benefit was observed regarding anastomotic leak. LIMITATIONS: Observational nature of the study cannot exclude residual bias. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective cohort from the NSQIP, robotic colectomy was associated with a significant reduction in postoperative ileus, unplanned conversion to open surgery, morbidity, and overall mortality when compared to laparoscopic colectomy.

The death of laparoscopy.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of laparoscopy in 1989 revolutionized surgical practices, reducing post-operative complications, and enhancing outcomes. Despite its benefits, limitations in laparoscopic tools have led to continued use of open surgery. Robotic-assisted surgery emerged to address these limitations, but its adoption trends and potential impact on open and laparoscopic surgery require analysis. METHODS: A retrospective analysis used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) databases from 2012 to 2021. The study encompassed various abdominal procedures, employing Vector Autoregressive (VAR) models to analyze the dynamic relationships between surgical techniques. The models predicted future trends in open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgery until Q2 of 2025. RESULTS: The analysis included 360,171 patients across diverse procedures. In urology, robotic surgery dominated prostatectomies (83.1% in 2021) and nephrectomies (55.1% in 2021), while the open approach remained the predominant surgical technique for cystectomies (72.5% in 2021). In general surgery, robotic colectomies were forecasted to surpass laparoscopy, becoming the primary approach by 2024 (45.7% in 2025). Proctectomies also showed a shift towards robotic surgery, predicted to surpass laparoscopy and open surgery by 2025 (32.3%). Pancreatectomies witnessed a steady growth in robotic surgery, surpassing laparoscopy in 2021, with forecasts indicating further increase. While hepatectomies remained predominantly open (70.0% in 2025), esophagectomies saw a rise in robotic surgery, predicted to become the primary approach by 2025 (52.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests a transformative shift towards robotic-assisted surgery, poised to dominate various minimally invasive procedures. The forecasts indicate that robotic surgery may surpass laparoscopy and open surgery in colectomies, proctectomies, pancreatectomies, and esophagectomies by 2025. This anticipated change emphasizes the need for proactive adjustments in surgical training programs to align with evolving surgical practices. The findings have substantial implications for future healthcare practices, necessitating a balance between traditional laparoscopy and the burgeoning role of robotic-assisted surgery.