TPT 8.12 Robotic Approach for Nonelective Cholecystectomies is Associated with More Postoperative Complications than Laparoscopic Approaches: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Clicks: 1
ID: 324055
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #396 of 432 articles by views in the british journal of surgery

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 432 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Background Robotic cholecystectomy (RC) is increasingly utilised for elective pathology, but its safety and efficacy acutely remain debated compared to the gold-standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of RC versus LC for patients undergoing non-elective (hot/emergency) cholecystectomy. Methods Standard medical databases MEDLINE, Embase, Pubmed and Cochrane Library were searched to find studies comparing RC versus LC for nonelective cholecystectomy. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager Software 5.4, and the meta-analysis was performed with the random effects model analysis. Results Eleven studies meeting inclusion criteria were identified, comprising a total of 1,200,338 patients. In the random effects model analysis, the robotic approach was associated with statistically significantly higher odds of postoperative complications (Odds ratio [OR]: 2.06; 95% confidence interval [CI 1.40, 3.05]; z=3.65, p=0.0003). However, RC and LC demonstrated no significant difference regarding conversion to open surgery (OR: 0.76; 95% [CI 0.42, 1.37]; z=0.94, p=0.35), operative time (Standardised mean difference [SMD] -0.03; 95% [CI -0.18, 0.11]; z=0.45, p=0.65), hospital length of stay (SMD 0.01; 95% [CI -0.07, 0.09]; z=0.17, p=0.86), intraoperative complications (OR 0.96; 95% [CI 0.77, 1.20]; z=0.35, p=0.73), or 30-day readmission (OR 1.09; 95% [CI 0.98, 1.21]; z=1.55, p=0.12). Conclusions RC for nonelective cholecystectomy appears feasible, with operative times, conversion rates, and hospital stay comparable to the laparoscopic approach. However, the higher odds of postoperative complications in the robotic group warrant caution. Patient selection and consideration of resource utilisation are essential when applying the robotic platform in the acute setting.
Reference Key
openalex_W7172499591 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Abir Mamun, Alex Whitworth, Wajeeh Ullah Mahmood, Yahya El-Tahlawy, Krishna K Singh, Muhammad S Sajid
Journal the british journal of surgery
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/bjs/znag087.269
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znag087.269
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.