Minimally invasive versus open duodenal switch: a nationwide retrospective analysis

6Citations
Citations of this article
11Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Introduction: This study aims to characterize the variability in clinical outcomes between open, laparoscopic, and robotic Duodenal Switch (DS). Methods: From the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery and Accreditation Quality Improvement Program, patients who underwent DS (2015–2018) were identified. Open DS was compared to laparoscopic and robotic approaches with for patients factors, perioperative characteristics, and 30-day postoperative outcomes. Logistic regression estimates were used to characterize variables associated with surgical site infections, bleeding, reoperation, readmission, and early discharge (hospital stay of ≤ one day). Results: Of 7649 cases, 411 (5.4%) were open, 5722 (74.8%) were laparoscopic, and 1515 (19.8%) were robotic DS. Open DS patients were more often older (≥ 65 years:4.7% vs. 4.3% vs. 2.1%, p < 0.01) and had lower body mass index (< 40 kg/m2:16.3% vs. 10.5% vs. 9.9%, p < 0.01). The co-morbidities were mainly comparable between the three groups. Open DS was more often without skilled assistance (35.3% vs. 12.1% vs. 5.3%, p < 0.01), revisional (41.4% vs. 20.5% vs. 21.3%, p < 0.01), and performed concurrently with other operations. Robotic DS surgery was more often longer (≥ 140 min:64.4% vs. 39.2% vs. 86.9%, p < 0.01). Post-operatively, open DS was associated with higher rates of surgical site infection (7.1% vs. 2% vs. 2.8%, p < 0.01), bleeding (2.4% vs. 0.7% vs. 0.9%, p = 0.001), reoperation (6.6% vs. 3.6% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.01), and readmission (12.4% vs. 6.8% vs. 8.3%, p = < 0.01). Patients undergoing robotic DS were more often discharged early (0.5% vs. 1% vs. 7.8%, p < 0.01). In the regression analyses, minimally invasive DS was associated with lower odds for wound infections (OR = 0.3,CI = [0.2–0.5]), bleeding (OR = 0.4,CI = [0.2–0.8]), and readmission (OR = 0.6,CI = [0.4–0.8]), as well as greater likelihood of early discharge (OR = 5.6 CI = [1.3–23.0]). Conclusion: Open DS is associated with greater risk for complications and excessive resource utilization when compared to minimally invasive approaches. Laparoscopic and robotic techniques should be prioritized in performing DS, despite the complexity of the procedure.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Al-Mazrou, A. M., Bellorin, O., Dhar, V., Dakin, G., & Afaneh, C. (2022). Minimally invasive versus open duodenal switch: a nationwide retrospective analysis. Surgical Endoscopy, 36(9), 7000–7007. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09020-4

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free