The evaluation of robotic cholecystectomy versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Cholecystectomy, performed for gallstone disease and other benign gallbladder conditions, is one of the most common abdominal surgeries worldwide. Over the past three decades, laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has become the gold standard due to its minimally invasive nature, shorter recovery, and reduced postoperative complications. However, its technical limitations—such as rigid instruments and two-dimensional imaging—pose challenges in complex cases. To address these, robotic-assisted cholecystectomy (RC) has emerged, offering enhanced visualization, wristed instrumentation, and improved ergonomics, which can aid in precise dissection, particularly in difficult anatomical situations**.** Despite its theoretical advantages, the clinical superiority of RC over LC remains uncertain. Several studies have reported similar outcomes in terms of postoperative pain, complications, and recovery, while also noting longer operative times and higher costs associated with RC. The justification for these increased resources in standard cases is still unclear. Moreover, much of the current evidence comes from retrospective studies with small sample sizes, lacking standardization and long-term outcomes. Given the rising adoption of robotic surgery, there is a clear need for prospective comparative studies. This study aims to assess the true clinical and economic value of RC versus LC, providing evidence-based guidance for surgical practice and resource optimization.