Robotic sleeve gastrectomy has higher complication rates compared to laparoscopic: 8-year analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic primary bariatric surgery

Graham J Spurzem; Ryan C Broderick; Emily K Kunkel; Hannah M Hollandsworth; Bryan J Sandler; Garth R Jacobsen; Santiago Horgan

doi:10.1016/j.soard.2024.11.014

Robotic sleeve gastrectomy has higher complication rates compared to laparoscopic: 8-year analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic primary bariatric surgery

Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2025 Apr;21(4):372-381. doi: 10.1016/j.soard.2024.11.014. Epub 2024 Dec 5.

Authors

Graham J Spurzem¹, Ryan C Broderick², Emily K Kunkel², Hannah M Hollandsworth², Bryan J Sandler², Garth R Jacobsen², Santiago Horgan²

Affiliations

¹ Division of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California. Electronic address: gspurzem@health.ucsd.edu.
² Division of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California.

PMID: 39732583
DOI: 10.1016/j.soard.2024.11.014

Abstract

Background: Robotic-assisted bariatric surgery is growing rapidly. The optimal approach to minimize complications remains unclear.

Objective: Assess robot utilization and compare 30-day outcomes for laparoscopic and robotic primary sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database.

Setting: United States.

Methods: A retrospective analysis of the MBSAQIP database identified primary SG and RYGB cases from 2015 to 2022. Revisions/conversions, cases converted to another approach, and combined cases other than esophagogastroduodenoscopy were excluded. Outcomes were compared with logistic regression following 1:1 propensity-score matching to adjust for differences in patient demographics/comorbidities and operative variables.

Results: A total of 823,902 cases (591,118 SG; 232,784 RYGB) were included. From 2015 to 2022, the percentage of SG and RYGB performed robotically increased from 6.7% and 6.9% to 29.5% and 31.8%, respectively. Compared to laparoscopic, robotic SG had significantly higher overall morbidity (odds ratio 1.14 [1.07-1.21], P < .001), leak (1.24 [1.05-1.46], P = .03), and bleeding rates (1.34 [1.13-1.58], P < .001). Robotic RYGB had significantly lower overall morbidity (.75 [.70-.81], P < .001) and bleeding (.80 [.68-.94], P < .01) with similar leak rates (.87 [.71-1.07], P = .18). Combined robotic SG and RYGB outcomes were similar to laparoscopic for 2020-2022 cases, except for higher rates of organ/space infection, readmission, and septic shock in the robotic group.

Conclusion: Robotic SG has higher complication rates compared to laparoscopic, while robotic RYGB is protective against bleeding complications. Short-term outcomes for robotic surgery have become more similar to laparoscopic, but remain inferior. Further studies are warranted to elucidate the factors driving these findings.

Keywords: Gastric bypass; Laparoscopic; MBSAQIP; Robotic bariatric surgery; Sleeve gastrectomy.

Publication types

Comparative Study

MeSH terms

Adult
Bariatric Surgery / adverse effects
Bariatric Surgery / methods
Bariatric Surgery / statistics & numerical data
Female
Gastrectomy* / adverse effects
Gastrectomy* / methods
Gastrectomy* / statistics & numerical data
Gastric Bypass / adverse effects
Gastric Bypass / methods
Gastric Bypass / statistics & numerical data
Humans
Laparoscopy* / adverse effects
Laparoscopy* / methods
Laparoscopy* / statistics & numerical data
Male
Middle Aged
Obesity, Morbid* / surgery
Postoperative Complications* / epidemiology
Postoperative Complications* / etiology
Retrospective Studies
Robotic Surgical Procedures* / adverse effects
Robotic Surgical Procedures* / methods
Robotic Surgical Procedures* / statistics & numerical data
United States / epidemiology