Author:
Campbell Stephen,Lee Shih-Hao,Liu Yuki,Wren Sherry M.
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Robotic-assisted cholecystectomy (RAC) is becoming increasingly common, but the outcomes of emergent/urgent robotic-assisted cholecystectomies compared to emergent laparoscopic (LC) and open cholecystectomies (OC) remain understudied.
Methods
The PINC AI Healthcare Database was queried to identify adults who underwent emergent or urgent (Em-Ur) cholecystectomy between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2020. Immediate postoperative and 30-day outcomes were identified including intraoperative complications, transfusion, conversion, postoperative complication, and hospital length of stay. Propensity score matching was done to compare outcomes between Em-Ur robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open cholecystectomies Subgroup analyses were performed comparing RAC done with and without fluorescent imaging as well as comparing RAC and LC performed for patients with class 3 obesity (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2).
Results
RAC Em-Ur cholecystectomies are being performed with increasing frequency and is the most utilized modality for patients with class 3 obesity. There was no difference in intraoperative complications (0.3%), bile duct injury (0.2%), or postoperative outcomes between RAC and LC. LC had significantly shorter operating room times (96 min (75,128)) compared to RAC (120 min (90,150)). There was a significant lower rate of conversion to open in RAC (1.9%) relative to LC (3.2%) in both the overall population and the class 3 obesity sub-analysis (RAC-2.6% vs. LC-4.4%). There was no difference in outcomes in robotic-assisted cholecystectomies done with and without fluorescent imaging.
Conclusions
A comparison of propensity score-matched cohorts of emergent/urgent robotic-assisted and laparoscopic cholecystectomy indicates that robotic-assisted cholecystectomy is a safe alternative to laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and that both have superior outcomes to open cholecystectomies.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Emergency Medicine,Surgery
Reference29 articles.
1. Hassler KR, Collins JT, Philip K, Jones MW. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy. In: StatPearls. Treasure Island, FL: StatPearls Publishing; 2023.
2. Jones MW, Guay E, Deppen JG. Open cholecystectomy. In: StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2022.
3. Shenoy R, Mederos MA, Ye L, et al. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of robot-assisted cholecystectomy: a systematic review. Syst Rev. 2021;10(1):124. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01673-x.
4. Muaddi H, Hafid ME, Choi WJ, et al. Clinical outcomes of robotic surgery compared to conventional surgical approaches (laparoscopic or open): a systematic overview of reviews. Ann Surg. 2021;273(3):467–73. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000003915.
5. Strosberg DS, Nguyen MC, Muscarella P 2nd, Narula VK. A retrospective comparison of robotic cholecystectomy versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: operative outcomes and cost analysis. Surg Endosc. 2017;31(3):1436–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5134-0.