Purpose: The aim of the study was to compare the perioperative outcomes of patients affected by inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) who underwent surgery performed through laparoscopy or using the Medtronic Hugo™ RAS.
Methods: This is a retrospective study from a prospectively maintained database comparing laparoscopic vs. robotic-assisted surgery for IBD from 01/11/2017 to 15/04/2024. All procedures were performed by a single surgeon robotic-naïve with a large experience in laparoscopic surgery for IBD. The robotic procedures were performed using the Medtronic Hugo™ RAS platform. Outcomes were 30-day postoperative complications, operative time, conversion rate, intraoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and readmission rate.
Results: Among 121 consecutive patients, 80 underwent laparoscopic (LG) and 41 robotic-assisted surgery (RG). Baseline, preoperative and disease-specific characteristics were comparable except for older age (50 [38-56] vs. 38 [28-54] years; p = 0.05) and higher albumin level (42 [40-44] vs. 40 [38-42] g/L, p = 0.006) in the RG. The intracorporeal anastomosis was more frequent in the RG (80% vs. 6%; p < 0.001) with longer operative time (240 vs. 205 min; p = 0.006), while the conversion rate was not different (5% vs. 10%, p = 0.49). Surgical procedure types were equally distributed between the two groups, and the rate of intra-abdominal septic complication (IASC) was comparable across the different procedures. Postoperative complications were similar, including the rate of IASC (5% vs. 5%, p = 1), postoperative ileus (5% vs. 7.5%, p = 0.71), bleeding (2% vs. 5%, p = 0.66), and Clavien-Dindo > 2 complications (7% vs. 6%; p = 1).
Conclusion: IBD surgery performed using the Medtronic Hugo™ RAS is safe and feasible, with similar postoperative outcomes when compared to the laparoscopic approach.
Keywords: Hugo RAS; Inflammatory bowel disease; Outcome; Robotic platform; Robotic surgery.
© 2024. The Author(s).