Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28726145›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2018

Robotic gastric bypass may lead to fewer complications compared with laparoscopy.

Dimitrios Stefanidis, Savannah B Bailey, Timothy Kuwada, Connie Simms, Keith Gersin

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. ROBOTIC VERSUS LAPAROSCOPIC ROUX-EN-Y-GASTRIC BYPASS: A RETROSPECTIVE STUDY IN A SINGLE CENTER.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Dimitrios StefanidisDepartment of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, 545 Barnhill Dr, EH 130, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA. dimstefa@iu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2177-0763
Savannah B BaileyUniversity of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.
Timothy KuwadaDepartment of Surgery, Carolinas Healthcare System, Charlotte, NC, USA.
Connie SimmsDepartment of Surgery, Carolinas Healthcare System, Charlotte, NC, USA.
Keith GersinDepartment of Surgery, Carolinas Healthcare System, Charlotte, NC, USA.
Carolinas Healthcare System · USIndiana University School of MedicineUniversity of South Carolina · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRobotic technology leads to improved visualization and precision over laparoscopy but also higher cost of care. The benefits of this technology to patient outcomes are controversial. Our objective was to assess whether the application of robotic surgery to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) would lead to improved patient outcomes.

methodsA prospectively collected database at a bariatric center of excellence was reviewed for all RYGB procedures performed by one surgeon between 2007 and 2015. Procedures performed laparoscopically (transoral circular stapling technique) versus robotically (hand-sewn anastomosis) were compared; the transition in technique occurred in 2011. Patient demographics, baseline weight, BMI, operation duration, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of hospital stay (LOS), morbidity and mortality, and percent excess weight loss (%EWL) at 1-year follow-up were compared between groups. Morbidity up to 1-year postop was assessed using the Clavien-Dindo classification.

resultsOf 246 patients, 125 underwent robotic and 121 laparoscopic RYGB. Patients in the robotic group were older and heavier but achieved similar  %EWL to the laparoscopic group. The operative duration was longer but the mean patient LOS was shorter with the robotic approach. There were no leaks and no mortality. Based on the Clavien-Dindo classification, fewer overall and fewer severe complications occurred in the robotic compared with the laparoscopic approach.

conclusionIn our experience, the use of robotic technology for the creation of gastric bypass led to longer operative times, similar %EWL but decreased LOS and number and severity of complications compared with the laparoscopic approach. Since our findings may have been influenced by the type of anastomotic technique used with each approach they need confirmation by a controlled trial.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresAdultCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleGastric BypassHumansMaleMiddle AgedObesity, MorbidOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsProspective StudiesBariatric surgeryComplicationsPatient outcomesRoboticRoux-en-Y gastric bypass

Identifiers

PMID28726145
OpenAlexW2736776609

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.