Robotic versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Length of Stay and Readmission.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Janique Abrahams, Marie Kiester M Faustino, Tommy K Dinh, Saajan Bhakta
{"title":"Robotic versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Length of Stay and Readmission.","authors":"Janique Abrahams, Marie Kiester M Faustino, Tommy K Dinh, Saajan Bhakta","doi":"10.4293/JSLS.2026.00047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Laparoscopy has long been the standard minimally invasive approach for gallbladder removal. Proponents suggest robotic surgery may improve outcomes such as readmission rates and length of stay.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review of the literature was conducted using articles from PubMed, EBSCO: Medline, and Cochrane databases. Peer-reviewed studies published between January 2015 and November 10, 2025, were included if they directly compared robotic cholecystectomy (RC) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) outcomes in adult patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen studies were included, consisting primarily of retrospective cohort studies, along with prospective cohort studies, ambispective cohort studies, and one randomized controlled trial. The age and sex distributions of patients were similar between the RC and LC groups. Most studies reported no statistically significant difference in length of stay or readmission rates between groups. One larger multicenter study demonstrated significantly lower readmission rates and a modest reduction in length of stay favoring RC; however, these findings were not consistently observed across the remaining studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>RC appears to offer similar short-term postoperative outcomes compared with LC with only one multicenter study reporting modest improvements favoring RC. Further high-quality studies are needed to determine whether robotic approaches provide clinically meaningful benefits.</p>","PeriodicalId":17679,"journal":{"name":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","volume":"30 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13492179/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2026.00047","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Laparoscopy has long been the standard minimally invasive approach for gallbladder removal. Proponents suggest robotic surgery may improve outcomes such as readmission rates and length of stay.

Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted using articles from PubMed, EBSCO: Medline, and Cochrane databases. Peer-reviewed studies published between January 2015 and November 10, 2025, were included if they directly compared robotic cholecystectomy (RC) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) outcomes in adult patients.

Results: Nineteen studies were included, consisting primarily of retrospective cohort studies, along with prospective cohort studies, ambispective cohort studies, and one randomized controlled trial. The age and sex distributions of patients were similar between the RC and LC groups. Most studies reported no statistically significant difference in length of stay or readmission rates between groups. One larger multicenter study demonstrated significantly lower readmission rates and a modest reduction in length of stay favoring RC; however, these findings were not consistently observed across the remaining studies.

Conclusion: RC appears to offer similar short-term postoperative outcomes compared with LC with only one multicenter study reporting modest improvements favoring RC. Further high-quality studies are needed to determine whether robotic approaches provide clinically meaningful benefits.

机器人与腹腔镜胆囊切除术:住院时间和再入院。
背景:腹腔镜长期以来一直是标准的微创胆囊切除方法。支持者认为,机器人手术可以改善再入院率和住院时间等结果。方法:对PubMed、EBSCO: Medline和Cochrane数据库中的文章进行系统的文献综述。2015年1月至2025年11月10日期间发表的同行评审研究,如果直接比较成人患者的机器人胆囊切除术(RC)和腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)的结果,则纳入其中。结果:纳入了19项研究,主要包括回顾性队列研究、前瞻性队列研究、双视角队列研究和一项随机对照试验。RC组和LC组患者的年龄和性别分布相似。大多数研究报告在两组住院时间和再入院率上没有统计学上的显著差异。一项更大的多中心研究表明,RC的再入院率显著降低,住院时间略有减少;然而,这些发现在其余的研究中并没有得到一致的观察。结论:与LC相比,RC似乎提供了相似的短期术后结果,只有一项多中心研究报告了有利于RC的适度改善。需要进一步的高质量研究来确定机器人方法是否提供临床有意义的益处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
69
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoscopic & Robotic Surgeons publishes original scientific articles on basic science and technical topics in all the fields involved with laparoscopic, robotic, and minimally invasive surgery. CRSLS, MIS Case Reports from SLS is dedicated to the publication of Case Reports in the field of minimally invasive surgery. The journals seek to advance our understandings and practice of minimally invasive, image-guided surgery by providing a forum for all relevant disciplines and by promoting the exchange of information and ideas across specialties.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书