Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Prospective Study Using Quality of Recovery Score (Myles QoR-15)

Abstract

Aim: Robotic surgery in the UK has increased rapidly since COVID-19 Pandemic. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) became the gold standard over a decade after its 1980s introduction. Robotic cholecystectomy (RC) offers enhanced visualisation, ergonomics, and an accessible training platform. However, its advantages over LC remain under evaluation, particularly patient-reported outcomes. This study compares patient reported recovery after RC and LC, using the Myles Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) score. Method(s): Patients who underwent elective RC or LC in our institution between June 2024 - 2025 were included. Procedure choice depended on theatre availability and patient preference. Recovery was assessed with QoR-15 questionnaires via telephone on postoperative days 1, 7, and 10, following informed consent. Scores were classified as 'Excellent'(136 -150), 'Good'(122 - 135), 'Moderate'(90 - 121), or 'Poor'(<90). Patients requiring redo surgery, conversion to open, or complications were excluded from recovery analysis. Result(s): Eighty-five patients were included: 60 RC and 25 LC. Median operative difficulty (Nassar grade) was 1 (1-5) and LOS was 1 day (0-2) in both. On day 1, 'Excellent'scores were recorded for 12/60 (20%) RC vs 0/25 (0%) LC (p=0.08); 'Moderate'42/60 (70%) vs 14/25 (56%) (p=0.15); 'Poor'for 6/60 (10%) vs 3/25 (12%) (p=0.87). 'Excellent'scores were reported in 42/60 (70%) RC vs 16/25 (63%) LC (p=0.76) on day 7, and in 50/60 (83%) RC vs 19/25 (76%) LC (p=0.59) on day 10. Conclusion(s): Robotic cholecystectomy shows comparable short-term patient-reported recovery to LC. These findings suggest potential benefits of RC in elective cases, particularly from the patient's perspective.