Three Hundred Four Robotically Assisted Biliopancreatic Diversion with Duodenal Switch Operations with Gradual Robotic Approach Implementation: Short-Term Outcomes, Complication Profile, and Lessons Learned



Community, academic affiliated hospital.


In the recent years, a movement towards robotic-assisted biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD/DS) has reported mixed short-term outcomes. We report our 10-year experience with robotic-assisted BPD/DS in our institution.


We conducted a retrospective analysis of 304 consecutive bariatric patients who had robotic or robotic-assisted BPD/DS from December 2008 to February 2018 from a single operating surgeon. Thirty 30-day and 90-day complication and readmission rates were analyzed. No patient was lost to follow-up.


The median age of the patients was 45 years (interquartile range (IQR) = 16; range = 20–72). Two hundred ten (69.1%) were female. The median pre-op body mass index (BMI) was 49.2 (IQR = 9; range = 34–79). Median operative time was 253.5 min (IQR = 61; range = 124–463). The median hospital length of stay (LOS) was 2 days (IQR = 2; range = 1–13). Thirty-day follow-up revealed 3 major and 20 minor events in 23 patients (7.6%) while there were 4 major and 7 minor events in 6 (2%) patients after 30 days. There were 15 (5%) readmissions within 30 days and 10 (3.2%) additional readmissions occurred past 30 days, but within 90-day period. A need for going back to operating room was observed in 4 (1.3%) patients within 30 days and an additional 5 (1.6%) needed an operation beyond 30 days, but within 90-day period. There was no anastomotic leak and no mortality recorded.


Robotic-assisted BPD/DS is safe with low early morbidity and mortality.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1


  1. 1.

    Buchwald H, Estok R, Fahrbach K, et al. Weight and type 2 diabetes after bariatric surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Med. 2009;122(3):248–56. e5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Marceau P, Biron S, Marceau S, et al. Long-term metabolic outcomes 5 to 20 years after biliopancreatic diversion. Obes Surg. 2015;25(9):1584–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Skogar ML, Sundbom M. Weight loss and effect on co-morbidities in the long-term after duodenal switch and gastric bypass: a population-based cohort study. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2020;16(1):17–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Bolckmans R, Himpens J. Long-term (>10 yrs) outcome of the laparoscopic biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch. Ann Surg. 2016;264(6):1029–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Risstad H, Sovik TT, Engstrom M, et al. Five-year outcomes after laparoscopic gastric bypass and laparoscopic duodenal switch in patients with body mass index of 50 to 60: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Surg. 2015;150(4):352–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Scopinaro N, Gianetta E, Civalleri D, et al. Bilio-pancreatic bypass for obesity: 1. An experimental study in dogs. Br J Surg. 1979;66(9):613–7.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    DeMeester TR, Fuchs KH, Ball CS, et al. Experimental and clinical results with proximal end-to-end duodenojejunostomy for pathologic duodenogastric reflux. Ann Surg. 1987;206(4):414–26.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Hess DS, Hess DW. Biliopancreatic diversion with a duodenal switch. Obes Surg. 1998;8(3):267–82.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Hedberg J, Sundstrom J, Sundbom M. Duodenal switch versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for morbid obesity: systematic review and meta-analysis of weight results, diabetes resolution and early complications in single-centre comparisons. Obes Rev. 2014;15(7):555–63.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Sudan R, Maciejewski ML, Wilk AR, et al. Comparative effectiveness of primary bariatric operations in the United States. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2017;13(5):826–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Sovik TT, Taha O, Aasheim ET, et al. Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic gastric bypass versus laparoscopic duodenal switch for superobesity. Br J Surg. 2010;97(2):160–6.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Fourman MM, Saber AA. Robotic bariatric surgery: a systematic review. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2012;8(4):483–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Cirocchi R, Boselli C, Santoro A, et al. Current status of robotic bariatric surgery: a systematic review. BMC Surg. 2013;13:53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Bindal V, Bhatia P, Dudeja U, et al. Review of contemporary role of robotics in bariatric surgery. J Minim Access Surg. 2015;11(1):16–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Sebastian R, Howell MH, Chang KH, et al. Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy: a propensity score-matched comparative analysis using the 2015-2016 MBSAQIP database. Surg Endosc. 2019;33(5):1600–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Pastrana M, Stoltzfus J, AlMandini A, El Chaar M (2020) Evolution of outcomes of robotic bariatric surgery: first report based on MBSAQIP database. Surg Obes Relat Dis.

  17. 17.

    Antanavicius G, Rezvani M, Sucandy I. One-stage robotically assisted laparoscopic biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch: analysis of 179 patients. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2015;11(2):367–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Antanavicius G, Halawani HM. Single-docking robotic biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch technique. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2017;13(11):1922–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Antanavicius G, Mohammed R, Van Houtte O. Total robotic biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch technique. Obes Surg. 2017;27(4):1104–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Brethauer SA, Kim J, el Chaar M, et al. Standardized outcomes reporting in metabolic and bariatric surgery. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2015;11(3):489–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    O'Brien PE, Hindle A, Brennan L, et al. Long-term outcomes after bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of weight loss at 10 or more years for all bariatric procedures and a single-bentre review of 20-year outcomes after adjustable gastric banding. Obes Surg. 2019;29(1):3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Antanavicius G, Sucandy I. Robotically-assisted laparoscopic biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch: the utility of the robotic system in bariatric surgery. J Robot Surg. 2013;7(3):261–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Roslin M, Tugertimur B, Zarabi S, et al. Is there a better design for a bariatric procedure? The case for a single anastomosis duodenal switch. Obes Surg. 2018;28(12):4077–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Magee CJ, Barry J, Brocklehurst J, et al. Outcome of laparoscopic duodenal switch for morbid obesity. Br J Surg. 2011;98(1):79–84.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Edholm D, Axer S, Hedberg J, et al. Laparoscopy in duodenal switch: safe and halves length of stay in a nationwide cohort from the Scandinavian obesity registry. Scand J Surg. 2017;106(3):230–4.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Strain GW, Torghabeh MH, Gagner M, et al. The impact of biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD/DS) over 9 years. Obes Surg. 2017;27(3):787–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Sudan R, Puri V, Sudan D. Robotically assisted biliary pancreatic diversion with a duodenal switch: a new technique. Surg Endosc. 2007;21(5):729–33.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Sudan R, Podolsky E. Totally robot-assisted biliary pancreatic diversion with duodenal switch: single dock technique and technical outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2015;29(1):55–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Hess DS, Hess DW, Oakley RS. The biliopancreatic diversion with the duodenal switch: results beyond 10 years. Obes Surg. 2005;15(3):408–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Kim WW, Gagner M, Kini S, et al. Laparoscopic vs. open biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch: a comparative study. J Gastrointest Surg. 2003;7(4):552–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Paiva D, Bernardes L, Suretti L. Laparoscopic biliopancreatic diversion for the treatment of morbid obesity: initial experience. Obes Surg. 2001;11(5):619–22.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Piazza L, Pulvirenti A, Ferrara F, et al. Laparoscopic biliopancreatic diversion: our preliminary experience with 201 consecutive cases. Chir Ital. 2009;61(2):143–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Nelson D, Beekley A, Carter P, et al. Early results after introduction of biliopancreatic diversion/duodenal switch at a military bariatric center. Am J Surg. 2011;201(5):678–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Biertho L, Lebel S, Marceau S, et al. Perioperative complications in a consecutive series of 1000 duodenal switches. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2013;9(1):63–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Yolsuriyanwong K, Ingviya T, Kongkamol C, et al. Effects of intraoperative leak testing on postoperative leak-related outcomes after primary bariatric surgery: an analysis of the MBSAQIP database. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2019;15(9):1530–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Skogar ML, Sundbom M (2020) Early complications, long-term adverse events, and quality of life after duodenal switch and gastric bypass in a matched national cohort. Surg Obes Relat Dis

  37. 37.

    Macht R, Cassidy R, Cabral H, et al. Evaluating organizational factors associated with postoperative bariatric surgery readmissions. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2017;13(6):1004–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Abraham CR, Werter CR, Ata A, et al. Predictors of hospital readmission after bariatric surgery. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;221(1):220–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Biertho L, Simon-Hould F, Marceau S, et al. Current outcomes of laparoscopic duodenal switch. Ann Surg Innov Res. 2016;10:1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Perez RE, Schwaitzberg SD (2019) Robotic surgery: finding value in 2019 and beyond. Ann Laparosc Endosc Surg ;4

  41. 41.

    Abeles D, Kim JJ, Tarnoff ME, et al. Primary laparoscopic gastric bypass can be performed safely in patients with BMI >or= 60. J Am Coll Surg. 2009;208(2):236–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Oliak D, Ballantyne GH, Davies RJ, et al. Short-term results of laparoscopic gastric bypass in patients with BMI > or = 60. Obes Surg. 2002;12(5):643–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Theodoros Katsichtis.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Antanavicius, G., Katsichtis, T., Alswealmeen, W. et al. Three Hundred Four Robotically Assisted Biliopancreatic Diversion with Duodenal Switch Operations with Gradual Robotic Approach Implementation: Short-Term Outcomes, Complication Profile, and Lessons Learned. OBES SURG 30, 3961–3967 (2020).

Download citation


  • Bariatric surgery
  • Biliopancreatic diversion
  • Duodenal switch
  • Complications
  • Laparoscopy
  • Robotic surgery