Pontecorvo, Agustina A.

Purpose: With the increasing prevalence of sleeve gastrectomy, complications and insufficient weight loss have become more common, making conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) a frequent revisional approach. Given the higher risk of revisional surgery, we aimed to compare primary versus conversion RYGB surgery and assess whether robotic assistance impacts outcomes. Method: This retrospective study included 378 patients after 2:1 propensity score matching based on demographic and clinical characteristics, comparing primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (P-RYGB) with sleeve gastrectomy–to–Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (SG-RYGB). The matched cohort included both robotic and laparoscopic cases performed at a single tertiary center between 2012 and 2024. A secondary 2:1 matched sub-analysis of robotic cases ( n = 297) evaluated whether robotic assistance reduced differences between primary and revisional surgery. Weight-loss outcomes were assessed at 6 and 12 months in the full cohort, with an additional sub-analysis limited to SG-RYGB performed for weight-loss indications. Results: In the full cohort ( n = 378), SG-RYGB was associated with longer operative time, greater blood loss ( P < .001), longer hospital stay ( P = .04), and higher late complication rates ( P = .04). In the robotic-only matched analysis ( n = 297), differences in operative time and blood loss were no longer significant, and early and late outcomes were comparable, although length of stay still remained longer for SG-RYGB ( P = .05). Among patients undergoing SG-RYGB for weight loss purposes only, total body weight loss percentage reached 16.5% ± 6.6% at 6 months and 20.4% ± 7.1% at 12 months but remained lower than that observed in the P-RYGB group ( P < .001). Conclusion: SG-RYGB conversion demonstrated favorable outcomes and meaningful weight loss. Robotic assistance was associated with improved operative time, reduced blood loss, and fewer late complications in the SG-RYGB group, further narrowing differences with P-RYGB, supporting its role in complex revisional bariatric surgery at high-volume centers.

Background: Robotic-assisted laparoscopic adrenalectomy (RALA) became a useful tool for the treatment of adrenal lesions. This study aims to identify areas where RALA may offer better outcomes than laparoscopic techniques. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study between August 2014 and November 2024. We involved 321 patients who underwent adrenalectomy during this time. Among these patients, 170 had laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA), and 151 underwent RALA. We grouped these patients according to the surgical approach, collected, and analyzed preoperative data, and compared their perioperative and postoperative outcomes. Results: In this study, we compared two groups, showing the robotic approach was associated with a significantly shorter operative time compared with the laparoscopic group, 100.5 (±51.7) minutes versus 117.9 (±67.4) minutes, P = .02. There were no significant differences in estimated blood loss ( P = .97) or conversion to open ( P = .6) between the two groups. But robotic patients did exhibit a shorter duration of hospital stay, a median of 1 versus 2 days in the case of the laparoscopic approach, P value <0.01, and statistically lower 30-day complication rates in the robotic approach, 7.3% versus 14.7%, P = .035. Other short- and long-term complications were comparable between the two groups. Subanalysis of large tumor mass (>5 cm) showed comparable outcomes, with robotic cases showing statistically lower early complication rates ( P = .05). Conclusion: The study shows that RALA offers some advantages compared to the traditional LA, particularly with shorter operative time, lesser hospital stay, and fewer early complications. More randomized trials will help to confirm the findings and reach a more definitive conclusion.