ArticleObesity surgery2026
Robotic-Assisted Bariatric Surgery Compared to Standard Laparoscopy-Utilization Trends, Outcomes, and Operative Times: MBSAQIP Data from 2018 to 2021.
Article in Obesity surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rise of robotic sleeve gastrectomy fails to show improved outcomes versus laparoscopy analysis of 9 years of MBSAQIP data including over half a million patients.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Evaluating trends and outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic bariatric surgery in patients with BMI ≥ 60 kg/mSurgical endoscopy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEvaluation of the utilization and outcomes of robotic-assisted bariatric surgery (RA-BS) is needed. This study investigates the current utilization trends and outcomes of robotic-assisted (RA) versus laparoscopic primary bariatric surgery.
methodsRA and laparoscopic primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) were compared using the 2018-2021 MBSAQIP participant user data files. A total of 678,357 patients were propensity matched 1:1 based on 12 variables. A total of 198,630 patients were included in the study group: 145,858 matched to SG and 52,772 to RYGB.
resultsFrom 2018 to 2021, there was an increase in the percentage of RA-BS procedures from 10 to 25%. L-SG had significantly lower rates of superficial infection (0.22% vs. 0.29%), organ space infection (0.18% vs. 0.24%), post-operative transfusion (0.46% vs. 0.68%), gastrointestinal bleed (0.19% vs. 0.26), and reoperation (0.63% vs. 0.74%) compared to RA-SG. RA-RYGB had significantly lower rates of superficial infection (0.37% vs. 0.8%), post-operative transfusion (0.75% vs. 1.1%), and gastrointestinal bleed (0.6% vs. 0.9%) compared to L-RYGB. There were statistically significant decreases in operative time, and 30-day outcomes of reoperation, intervention, and readmission for both laparoscopic and RA-BS over time from 2018 to 2021.
conclusionThere was a progressive increase in the number and percentage of RA procedures. Most perioperative outcomes were statistically equivalent. RA-RYGB was associated with lower complication rates of infection and bleeding, while RA-SG was associated with higher rates of infection, bleeding, and reoperation. Continued research is needed to understand the efficacy and clinical significance of RA-BS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41107659What 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.