ArticleUpdates in surgery2025
Robotic bariatric surgery: the Italian point of view to go beyond.
Article in Updates in surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safety, feasibility, and early outcomes of one hundred robotic bariatric procedures at a high-volume center.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic versus laparoscopic one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB): a propensity score-matched comparative study of perioperative outcomes in 200 patients.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Pure single-port robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in a patient with metabolic syndrome: first worldwide report.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Prospective comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic one-anastomosis gastric bypass: real-life analysis of procedural standardization and safety during the initial adoption phase.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Early Outcomes, Learning Curve and Cost Analysis of Totally Robotic Sleeve Gastrectomy.Obesity surgery · 2026Article
- The real evolution: robotic surgery as a teaching tool, not a threat.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- More procedures, more efficiency: optimizing operating room during the phase of learning curve-experience of first 100 robotic bariatric procedures in a single center.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Italian robotic community discussed critical issues about data of robotic bariatric surgery activity in Italy. A working group of Italian bariatric surgeon evaluated the current evidence on robotic use discussed its limits, advantages and future perspective in bariatric field. The chair of the working group (MR) and a group of participants (G.F., B.P., G.N.) reported results of Italian SICOB Registry data and discussed about future perspective on the behalf of the Italian Working Group on Robotic Bariatric Surgery (IGRoBS). MATERIAL: Database of SICOB Italian Registry was analysed since 2014. All procedures were categorized by years from 2014 to October 2024 and evaluated compared than total bariatric procedures (robotic rate). Type of procedures was classified: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB), Sleeve Gastrectomy (SG), Single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass (SADIS), Gastric Plication (GP), Gastric Banding (GB) .
results168.309 bariatric procedures from 2014 to October 2024 was recorded in SICOB Registry. 1086 procedures (0.64%) were recorded as robotic approach. Robotic bariatric procedures increased by years from 19 robotic procedures in 2014 to 344 procedures in the first 10 months in 2024. Robotic bariatric rate increased in the last years from 0,2% in 2014 to 3,7% in 2024. Robotic procedure types were RYGB 549, SG 433, OAGB 73, SADIS 21, GP 10, GB 5. In the last year, robotic SG was more widespread than other procedures (174 SG versus 147 RYGB).
conclusionData showed an increased robotic activity in Italy. Literature reported that more complex procedures, such as revisional procedures, bariatric procedures combined with hiatal hernia repair, and complex cases, including superobese patients and procedures requiring manual anastomosis are promising areas for validating the use of robotic surgery. Future prospective could be resume in three answer: could robotic platforms be more useful than laparoscopy for achieving a safe and efficient learning curve? Could it offer a viable path toward solo-surgery? Could it value for AI applications, and for training and proctoring of new users?
Indexed as
Identifiers
40175695What 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.