ArticleObesity surgery2020
The Longitudinal Efficiency of Robotic Surgery: an MBSAQIP Propensity Matched 4-Year Comparison of Robotic and Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery.
Article in Obesity surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multi-centric international 10-year review of surgical magnetic mechatronics in HPB, bariatrics, OB-GYN, urology and neurosurgery: minimally invasive technology, robot design & actuator-sensor fusion.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Redefining Clavien-Dindo Classification in MBSAQIP: Laparoscopic Vs. Robotic Sleeve Gastrectomy.Obesity surgery · 2026Article
- Evaluating trends and outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic bariatric surgery in patients with BMI ≥ 60 kg/mSurgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- The longitudinal inefficiency of robotic bariatric surgery: can we finally agree we are over the learning curve and robotic bariatric surgery just takes longer?Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Robotic-Assisted Bariatric Surgery Compared to Standard Laparoscopy-Utilization Trends, Outcomes, and Operative Times: MBSAQIP Data from 2018 to 2021.Obesity surgery · 2026Article
- Comparison of early perioperative outcomes of robotic assisted bariatric surgery vs laparoscopic bariatric surgery in a center of excellence.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Robotic-Assisted and Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgeries Still Have Clinically Comparable Outcomes.Obesity surgery · 2024Article
- Improving Operating Room Efficiency of Robotic-Assisted Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Through Standardization.Obesity surgery · 2023Article
- Article
- Robotic-Assisted Bariatric Surgery Is Associated with Increased Postoperative Complications Compared to Laparoscopic: a Nationwide Readmissions Database Study.Obesity surgery · 2023Article
- Establishing robotic bariatric surgery at an academic tertiary hospital: a learning curve analysis for totally robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- 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 · 2023Article
- Is Robotic Revisional Bariatric Surgery Justified? An MBSAQIP Analysis.Obesity surgery · 2022Article
- Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic approach to concurrent bariatric surgery and hiatal hernia repair: propensity score matching analysis using the 2015-2018 MBSAQIP.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Robotic vs. Laparoscopic Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, Outcomes over 5 Years in Nearly 800,000 Patients.Obesity surgery · 2022Article
- Five Year Trends in the Utilization of Robotic Bariatric Surgery Procedures, United States 2015-2019.Obesity surgery · 2022Article
- Ten Year Trends in Minimally Invasive Surgery Fellowship.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsArticle
- Robotic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: A Single Surgeon's Experience with 527 Consecutive Patients.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe objective of this study was to examine the MBSAQIP database to assess efficiency trends and perioperative outcomes in robotic bariatric surgery.
methodsRobotic (RA) and laparoscopic (L) sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and gastric bypass (RYGB) were compared using the 2015-2018 MBSAQIP Participant Use Data Files. Patients were propensity matched 1:1 based on sex, body mass index, assistant, and previous obesity or foregut surgery. A total of 93,802 patients were included.
resultsMedian operative times were significantly longer for both RA-SG (89 vs. 62 min; p < 0.0001) and RA-RYGB (141 vs. 105 min; p < 0.0001) compared with laparoscopic. Over the 4-year period, the difference in operative times (OR delta) between RA-SG and L-SG was unchanged while the difference in operative times between RA-RYGB and L-RYGB increased. Both robotic groups were significantly more likely to be readmitted (RA-SG p = 0.001, RA-RYGB p = 0.006). Robotic SG was more likely to have a reintervention (p = 0.018) and extended length of stay (LOS) (> 4 days) compared with laparoscopic (p = < 0.0002). No significant differences were noted in morbidity and mortality by approach.
conclusionsOperative times were 30% longer for RA-SG and 25% longer for RA-RYGB when compared with laparoscopic. There was no significant improvement in OR delta for either RA-SG or RA-RYGB over the four years. Readmission rates were higher for both RA-SG and RA-RYGB. Robotic SG had a greater percentage of patients with extended LOS compared with laparoscopic. No evidence of improved efficiency for robotic bariatric surgery as defined by operative time or clinical outcomes was identified.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.