A comparison of outcomes between laparoscopic and robotic appendectomy among ACS-NSQIP hospitals

Objective

Robotic general surgery remains controversial, with some employing the technology for common laparoscopic procedures such as appendectomies. Very few studies have compared robotic appendectomy (RA) to existing techniques, partly due to the relative scarcity of data. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes for RA versus laparoscopic appendectomy (LA).

Methods

This retrospective cohort study evaluated procedural specific databases of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) for appendectomy between January 2016 and December 2019 and included all available cases at the time of analysis (June 2021). Demographic and surgical outcomes including composite 30-day complications, specific complications, and length of operation were analyzed using a univariate analysis.

Results

In total, there were 52,559 appendectomies in the NSQIP database between 2016 and 2019. Analysis was restricted to those who underwent minimally invasive approaches. In total, 49,850 patients were included in the analysis. Of those, 49,800 patients underwent LA, and 50 patients underwent RA. Participants who underwent RA were older (35.8 ± 4.5 y vs. 23.0 ± 0.2 y, p < 0.01). There was no difference in the total number of comorbidities (92.0% vs. 73.4%, p = 0.32) or the severity of appendicitis (p > 0.90) between RA and LA cases. RA had a longer median operation time (71.0 min vs. 46.0 min, p < 0.01) but a shorter postoperative stay (0.7 d vs. 1.3 d, p < 0.01). There was no difference in the frequency of readmission likely related to procedure (4.0% vs. 3.0%, p = 0.88) or complications (18.0% vs. 23.8%, p = 0.88); however, RA was associated with increased 30-day mortality (2.0% vs. <0.1%, p < 0.01) compared to LA.

Conclusion

Our results demonstrated that LA and RA had a similar frequency and profile of complications. Robotic procedures took longer but resulted in shorter postoperative stays. Our study revealed that RA constituted a mere 0.1% of all cases, with only 50% showing pathology consistent with appendicitis, despite 92.2% of LA cases presenting with the condition. Despite our findings of RA offering some benefit, more research is necessary, particularly regarding outcomes and value delivery.