Robotic cholecystectomy using Senhance robotic platform versus laparoscopic conventional cholecystectomy: a propensity score analysis

Abstract

Introduction

Our study objective was to evaluate differences in intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of robotic cholecystectomy (RC) using Senhance robotic platform vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

Material and methods

A retrospective case – matched analysis was performed for all patients who underwent cholecystectomy from November 2018 to November 2019. RC cases were matched to LC. RC was performed using Senhance robotic platform. Propensity score matching analysis with a ratio of 1:1 (RC: LC) was performed. The groups were matched according to age, sex, body mass index (BMI). All procedures were performed by two same experienced robotic surgeons at Klaipeda University Hospital (O.D. and V.E.). Age, BMI, operative time, blood loss and length of hospital stay were collected and analysed between those patient groups.

Results

A total of 40 patients underwent RC or LC. There were no statistical differences between groups in concern of length of hospital stay, blood loss or complications. There were no bile duct injuries in either group, no intraoperative complications, no conversions either RC to LC or LC to open surgery. One patient in robotic group was reoperated on postoperative day 5 regarding sub-hepatic haematoma. The only statistical significance was in operative time (p < .05) which was longer in RC group. Median docking time was 12 min (range 5–23).

Conclusions

Robotic cholecystectomy using Senhance robotic platform appears to be safe in comparison with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy might be feasible in gaining robotic surgery skills.

Keywords:

• Robotic surgery
• laparoscopic surgery
• cholecystectomy
• Senhance robotic platform

Author contributions

NES made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work. TK analysed and interpreted the patient data and performed the literature search and manuscript writing. ZZ analysed and interpreted the patient data and drafted the manuscript. VJ drafted the manuscript and performed data analysis. OD collected the patient data performed analysis. VE collected the patient data and performed analysis. VN made substantial contributions to the conception. AD made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work; performed the literature search and manuscript writing. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Disclosure statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.