Risk factors for PPCs in laparoscopic non–robotic vs. laparoscopic robotic abdominal surgery (LapRas): rationale and protocol for a patient–level analysis of LAS VEGAS and AVATaR

Abstract

Introduction

Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) vary amongst different surgical techniques. We aim to compare the incidence of PPCs after laparoscopic non–robotic versus laparoscopic robotic abdominal surgery.

Methods and analysis

LapRas (Risk Factors for PPCs in Laparoscopic Non–robotic vs Laparoscopic robotic abdominal surgery) incorporates harmonized data from 2 observational studies on abdominal surgery patients and PPCs: ‘Local ASsessment of VEntilatory management during General Anaesthesia for Surgery’ (LAS VEGAS), and ‘Assessment of Ventilation during general AnesThesia for Robotic surgery' (AVATaR). The primary endpoint is the occurrence of one or more PPCs in the first five postoperative days. Secondary endpoints include the occurrence of each individual PPC, hospital length of stay and in–hospital mortality. Logistic regression models will be used to identify risk factors for PPCs in laparoscopic non–robotic versus laparoscopic robotic abdominal surgery. We will investigate whether differences in the occurrence of PPCs between the two groups are driven by differences in duration of anesthesia and/or the intensity of mechanical ventilation.

Ethics and dissemination

This analysis will address a clinically relevant research question comparing laparoscopic and robotic assisted surgery. No additional ethical committee approval is required for this metanalysis. Data will be shared with the scientific community by abstracts and original articles submitted to peer-reviewed journals.

Registration

The registration of this post-hoc analysis is pending; individual studies that were merged into the used database were registered at clinicaltrials.gov: LAS VEGAS with identifier NCT01601223, AVATaR with identifier NCT02989415.