Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11434/2109
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSoon, David Sien Chin-
dc.contributor.authorMoar, Xavier-
dc.contributor.authorDewei, Jordan Lee-
dc.contributor.authorMoore, Patrick-
dc.contributor.authorClough, Anthony-
dc.date.accessioned2022-07-21T04:37:03Z-
dc.date.available2022-07-21T04:37:03Z-
dc.date.issued2022-06-
dc.identifier.citationSurg Endosc . 2022 Jun;36(6):4025-4031en_US
dc.identifier.issn0930-2794en_US
dc.identifier.issn1432-2218en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11434/2109-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Robotic surgery is a novel approach to abdominal surgery. In Australia, the uptake of robotic assistance for bariatric surgery has been relatively slow compared to many other countries. The aim of this study is to report the first high volume experience of robotic-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery in Australia (RRYGB) and compare outcomes with a similar laparoscopic group (LRYGB). Methods: Retrospective analysis of 100 RRYGB versus 100 LRYGB was carried out over a period of seven years performed by two surgeons. These groups were matched by revisional status. Outcomes recorded included operative times, conversion rate, hospital stay, short-term (30 days) complication rates, and long-term complication rates. Baseline comorbidities of patients were also recorded. Results: Baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar except for comorbidity rates (higher in LRYGB group). The mean age was 43 (RRYGB) and 44(LRYGB) years, respectively. The mean pre-op BMI was 44.3 in the RRYGB group and 44.7 in the LRYGB group. Mean operating time in the RRYGB group was 208 min compared to 175 min in the LRYGB group. The number of patients with major complications was 1 in the robotic group versus 5 in the laparoscopic group (P: 0.2166). Minor complications were higher in the robotic group (17 vs. 5, P: 0.0054). Median length of stay of patients with RRYGB was 4 days compared to 5 days for the LRYGB group. Conclusion: RRYGB has been successfully implemented in Australia with low complication rates compared to conventional laparoscopic RYGB. Operating times are longer compared to LRYGB which is consistent with most published literature. To justify increased costs generally associated with robotic surgery, better quality studies are needed to accurately assess potential cost savings with length of stay and safety benefits to patients and institutions.en_US
dc.publisherSpringeren_US
dc.subjectRobotic Surgeryen_US
dc.subjectBariatric Surgeryen_US
dc.subjectLaparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypassen_US
dc.subjectRobotic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypassen_US
dc.subjectObesityen_US
dc.subjectAbdominal Surgeryen_US
dc.subjectAustraliaen_US
dc.subjectClinical Institute General Surgery and Gastroenterology, Epworth Healthcare, Richmond, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.titleAustralian experience with robot-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with comparison to a conventional laparoscopic series.en_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00464-021-08723-4en_US
dc.identifier.journaltitleSurgical Endoscopyen_US
dc.description.pubmedurihttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34524534/en_US
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of General Surgical Specialties, Royal Melbourne Hospital, 300 Grattan St, Parkville, VIC, 3050, Australia.en_US
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of General Surgery, St Vincent's Private Hospital, 22-36 Scott St, Toowomba, QLD, 4350, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of General Surgical Specialties, Royal Melbourne Hospital, 300 Grattan St, Parkville, VIC, 3050, Australia.en_US
dc.type.studyortrialRetrospective studiesen_US
dc.type.contenttypeTexten_US
Appears in Collections:General Surgery and Gastroenterology

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in Epworth are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.