Robotic Technology in Emergency General Surgery Cases in the Era of Minimally Invasive Surgery

Authors:
Top Cited Papers
Publisher website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Importance: Although robotic surgery has become an established approach for a wide range of elective operations, data on its utility and outcomes are limited in the setting of emergency general surgery.Objectives: To describe temporal trends in the use of laparoscopic and robotic approaches and compare outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for 4 common emergent surgical procedures.Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study of an all-payer discharge database of 829 US facilities was conducted from calendar years 2013 to 2021. Data analysis was performed from July 2022 to November 2023. A total of 1 067 263 emergent or urgent cholecystectomies (n = 793 800), colectomies (n = 89 098), inguinal hernia repairs (n = 65 039), and ventral hernia repairs (n = 119 326) in patients aged 18 years or older were included.Exposure: Surgical approach (robotic, laparoscopic, or open) to emergent or urgent cholecystectomy, colectomy, inguinal hernia repair, or ventral hernia repair.Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the temporal trend in use of each operative approach (laparoscopic, robotic, or open). Secondary outcomes included conversion to open surgery and length of stay (both total and postoperative). Temporal trends were measured using linear regression. Propensity score matching was used to compare secondary outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery groups.Results: During the study period, the use of robotic surgery increased significantly year-over-year for all procedures: 0.7% for cholecystectomy, 0.9% for colectomy, 1.9% for inguinal hernia repair, and 1.1% for ventral hernia repair. There was a corresponding decrease in the open surgical approach for all cases. Compared with laparoscopy, robotic surgery was associated with a significantly lower risk of conversion to open surgery: cholecystectomy, 1.7% vs 3.0% (odds ratio [OR], 0.55 [95% CI, 0.49-0.62]); colectomy, 11.2% vs 25.5% (OR, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.32-0.42]); inguinal hernia repair, 2.4% vs 10.7% (OR, 0.21 [95% CI, 0.16-0.26]); and ventral hernia repair, 3.5% vs 10.9% (OR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.25-0.36]). Robotic surgery was associated with shorter postoperative lengths of stay for colectomy (−0.48 [95% CI, −0.60 to −0.35] days), inguinal hernia repair (−0.20 [95% CI, −0.30 to −0.10] days), and ventral hernia repair (−0.16 [95% CI, −0.26 to −0.06] days).Conclusions and Relevance: While robotic surgery is still not broadly used for emergency general surgery, the findings of this study suggest it is becoming more prevalent and may be associated with better outcomes as measured by reduced conversion to open surgery and decreased length of stay.

This publication has 44 references indexed in Scilit: