ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
Robotic-assisted sleeve gastrectomy: an analysis of cost, peri-operative outcomes and learning curve in a prospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Live, proctored robotic training for the novice robotic surgeon: outcomes and educational value of the Portsmouth Robotic Essentials Course.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
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
Minimally invasive sleeve gastrectomy as a treatment for individuals living with severe obesity remains the most common operation in bariatric and metabolic surgery. With the introduction of robotic-assisted surgery, an increasing proportion of sleeve gastrectomies are performed using the da Vinci robotic surgical platform. To date, the evidence to support or contest this practice is still unclear although meta-analyses have shown safety and feasibility. Here we present a prospective cohort study comparing 101 consecutive patients who had either robotic-assisted or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy for obesity. Short-term outcomes, including length of stay and thirty-day complication rates, as well as the total consumable cost for both the laparoscopic and robotic-assisted procedures were collected. We also assessed the learning curve associated with robotic-assisted sleeve gastrectomy. The cohort had similar baseline characteristics in terms of BMI and co-morbidity. The mean operative time, post-operative CRP and complication rates were the same in both groups. Length of stay was statistically shorter for the robotic-assisted cohort in comparison to the laparoscopic cohort; 1.3 days versus 1.9 days, respectively (p < 0.005). The percentage of patients requiring only a single night admission was significantly higher at 82% in the robotic-assisted group, compared to 32% in the laparoscopic group (p < 0.005); in the context of a nurse-led-discharge protocol. Total consumable cost was significantly lower in the robotic group at an average of £2310, compared to £2665 in the laparoscopic group (p < 0.001). The learning curve for the procedure was found to be 26 cases, predominantly driven by the resectional component of the procedure. Robotic-assisted sleeve gastrectomy on the 4th generation da Vinci system utilising robotic advanced energy and Sureform stapling is safe and effective. This cohort study suggests that using the robotic platform is favourable in terms of overall consumable cost and may reduce length of stay. In the context of previous robotic experience, the observed learning curve is relatively short.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40316868What 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.