ArticleObesity surgery2026
Transitioning From Laparoscopic to Robotic Bariatric Surgery: A Surgeon-Centered Analytic Approach.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Transitioning From Laparoscopic to Robotic Bariatric Surgery: A Surgeon-Centered Analytic Approach.Obesity surgery · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRobotic assistance is increasingly adopted by bariatric surgeons with extensive laparoscopic experience. Evidence from pooled data, however, does not help individual surgeons determine whether transitioning to a robotic practice improves outcomes.
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed bariatric procedures performed at 13 centers in the Pacific Northwest between 2011 and 2024. Surgeon-specific laparoscopic learning curves were modeled to estimate expected outcomes for robotic cases had they been performed laparoscopically. Observed robotic outcomes were then compared with these expectations to isolate the effect of robotic adoption. The study had > 80% power to detect an absolute difference in complication rates of approximately 1% point at a two-sided α of 0.05.
resultsAmong 22,914 bariatric procedures, 64.0% were laparoscopic and 34.8% robotic. Robotic utilization increased from 5.6% in 2011 to 66.2% in 2024. In unadjusted analyses, robotic gastric bypass was associated with lower surgical complication rates compared with laparoscopic gastric bypass (0.55% vs. 1.70%; P < 0.01). Four surgeons transitioned to a predominantly robotic practice (> 95% robotic after ≥ 300 laparoscopic cases), contributing 4,048 cases. Compared with expected complication rates modeled from continued laparoscopic performance, adjusted analysis showed that observed surgical complications after robotic adoption were not significantly different (absolute difference - 0.71%; 95% CI - 2.35 to 0.93). No significant differences were observed in systemic complications (- 0.44%; 95% CI - 1.78 to 0.89), 30-day readmission (- 0.55%; 95% CI - 1.52 to 0.43), or length of stay (- 0.16 days; 95% CI - 0.54 to 0.21).
conclusionsAmong experienced laparoscopic bariatric surgeons, improvements in outcomes after robotic adoption were attributable to ongoing skill maturation rather than the new technological platform. KEY POINTS: • Robotic bariatric surgery adoption rose from 6% in 2011 to 66% in 2024. • Laparoscopic surgeons' outcomes improved steadily with accumulating experience. • Robotic adoption did not independently reduce complications or readmissions. • Improvements after robotics mirrored ongoing laparoscopic skill maturation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42171976What 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.