Abstract Aim:Sleeve gastrectomy has been increasingly successful in recent years and the laparoscopic procedure has become the most common for the treatment of morbid obesity, thanks to its feasibility, safety and excellent results. RSG is still expanding, as an alternative surgical option. The aim of the study is to analyze if there are differences between laparoscopic and robotic techniques. Materials and methods: From May 2017 to February 2022, we selected 209 patients suffering from morbid obesity. We analyzed patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and patients who underwent robotic sleeve gastrectomy (RSG), which were treated at the Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences of the University of Foggia. Results:We studied 209 patients, 153 female and 56 male, who underwent sleeve gastrectomy. The mean age was 41.3 years. The mean weight was 129.7 kg and the mean BMI was 46.4 kg/m2. 67 patients underwent the robotic technique and 142 the laparoscopic one. The mean length of hospitalization was 5.47 days and was the same for both patient groups (p = 0.89). The mean operative time was 63,1 min for the laparoscopic approach and 97,4 min for the robotic technique (including the docking time (p = 0.041). The conversion rate and mortality are zero. There was only 1 case of re-do surgery in a patient undergoing the robotic approach after gastric band failure. We found 3 cases of post-operative complications: 2 leaks treated surgically and one bleeding underwent to medical treatment. Conclusions: There aren’t significant differences between the robotic and laparoscopic groups in terms of length of stay, EWL and complications, except for the mean operative time that is slightly higher in the robotic group and this difference is statistically significant. RSG proved to be a safe and efficient procedure, with satisfactory results comparable to LSG. Longer and larger studies are needed for a better comparative evaluation.
Robotic Sleeve Gastrectomy As New Approach For Morbid Obesity: Our Experience And A Literature Review
Tartaglia N.;Quazzico A.;Spagnoli N.;Martines G.;De Fazio M.;Picciariello A.;Fersini A.;
2022-01-01
Abstract
Abstract Aim:Sleeve gastrectomy has been increasingly successful in recent years and the laparoscopic procedure has become the most common for the treatment of morbid obesity, thanks to its feasibility, safety and excellent results. RSG is still expanding, as an alternative surgical option. The aim of the study is to analyze if there are differences between laparoscopic and robotic techniques. Materials and methods: From May 2017 to February 2022, we selected 209 patients suffering from morbid obesity. We analyzed patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and patients who underwent robotic sleeve gastrectomy (RSG), which were treated at the Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences of the University of Foggia. Results:We studied 209 patients, 153 female and 56 male, who underwent sleeve gastrectomy. The mean age was 41.3 years. The mean weight was 129.7 kg and the mean BMI was 46.4 kg/m2. 67 patients underwent the robotic technique and 142 the laparoscopic one. The mean length of hospitalization was 5.47 days and was the same for both patient groups (p = 0.89). The mean operative time was 63,1 min for the laparoscopic approach and 97,4 min for the robotic technique (including the docking time (p = 0.041). The conversion rate and mortality are zero. There was only 1 case of re-do surgery in a patient undergoing the robotic approach after gastric band failure. We found 3 cases of post-operative complications: 2 leaks treated surgically and one bleeding underwent to medical treatment. Conclusions: There aren’t significant differences between the robotic and laparoscopic groups in terms of length of stay, EWL and complications, except for the mean operative time that is slightly higher in the robotic group and this difference is statistically significant. RSG proved to be a safe and efficient procedure, with satisfactory results comparable to LSG. Longer and larger studies are needed for a better comparative evaluation.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
