ArticleCureus2026
Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes Between Conventional Laparoscopic Approach and Robot-Assisted Approach in Revision and Conversion Surgery: Experience at the National Medical Center "20 de Noviembre".
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Revision and conversion surgery (RCS) is technically demanding and associated with higher perioperative risk compared with primary bariatric procedures. The increasing adoption of robotic technology has expanded surgical options for complex revisional cases; however, comparative data from public healthcare institutions remain limited. This study aimed to compare perioperative outcomes between conventional laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic approaches (RALA) in patients undergoing RCS at a tertiary referral public center. Methods An observational, analytical, retrospective comparative study was conducted at the National Medical Center "20 de Noviembre," Instituto de Seguridad y Servicios Sociales de los Trabajadores del Estado (ISSSTE), Mexico City, including patients who underwent bariatric revisional surgery between January 2021 and December 2024 using either a conventional laparoscopic or RALA. Perioperative outcomes were compared between groups. Continuous variables were analyzed using Student's t-test or the Mann-Whitney U test, and categorical variables using the chi-square test, with statistical significance set at p < 0.05. Results A total of 90 patients underwent bariatric revisional surgery. The RALA was associated with significantly longer operative time than conventional laparoscopy (193.1 ± 25 vs 145.6 ± 18 minutes, p < 0.0001). Overall complication rates were low (3.3%), with no significant differences between groups, and no mortality was observed. Conversion rates were comparable between approaches. Conclusion In a high-volume public referral center, both conventional laparoscopic and robot-assisted RCS demonstrated favorable perioperative outcomes. Although operative time was significantly longer with the RALA, complication rates were comparable, with no mortality reported. These findings suggest that robot-assisted RCS may be a feasible approach in specialized centers; however, further prospective studies with larger cohorts and longer follow-up are needed to better define the comparative role of robotic and conventional laparoscopic approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.