Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic colectomy: cost and clinical outcomes
- PMID: 24960484
- PMCID: PMC4035631
- DOI: 10.4293/108680813X13753907291035
Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic colectomy: cost and clinical outcomes
Abstract
Background and objectives: Laparoscopic colectomies, with and without robotic assistance, are performed to treat both benign and malignant colonic disease. This study compared clinical and economic outcomes for laparoscopic colectomy procedures with and without robotic assistance.
Methods: Patients aged ≥18 years having primary inpatient laparoscopic colectomy procedures (cecectomy, right hemicolectomy, left hemicolectomy, and sigmoidectomy) identified by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Edition procedure codes performed between 2009 and the second quarter of 2011 from the Premier Hospital Database were studied. Patients were matched to a control cohort using propensity scores for disease, comorbidities, and hospital characteristics and were matched 1:1 for specific colectomy procedure. The outcomes of interest were hospital cost of laparoscopic robotic-assisted colectomy compared with traditional laparoscopic colectomy, surgery time, adverse events, and length of stay.
Results: Of 25,758 laparoscopic colectomies identified, 98% were performed without robotic assistance and 2% were performed with robotic assistance. After matching, 1066 patients remained, 533 in each group. Lengths of stay were not significantly different between the matched cohorts, nor were rates of major, minor, and/or surgical complications. Inpatient procedures with robotic assistance were significantly more costly than those without robotic assistance ($17,445 vs $15,448, P = .001). Operative times were significantly longer for robotic-assisted procedures (4.37 hours vs 3.34 hours, P < .001).
Conclusion: Segmental colectomies can be performed safely by either laparoscopic or robotic-assisted methods. Increased per-case hospital costs for robotic-assisted procedures and prolonged operative times suggest that further investigation is warranted when considering robotic technology for routine laparoscopic colectomies.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflicts of interest and source of funding: This study was funded by Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Cincinnati, Ohio. B.R.D. is a consultant for Ethicon Endo-Surgery and receives honoraria for course instruction. A.C.Y. is an employee of Ethicon Endo-Surgery, the sponsor of the study. M.M. was an employee of Ethicon Endo-Surgery, the sponsor of the study, at the time this research was completed. M.M. is now an employee of Edwards Lifesciences. C.G. is President of S2 Statistical Solutions, Inc., which is a paid consultant to Ethicon Endo-Surgery.
Comment in
-
Re: JSLS. 2014;18:211-224. Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic colectomy: cost and clinical outcomes.JSLS. 2015 Jan-Mar;19(1):e2015.00224. doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2015.00224. JSLS. 2015. PMID: 25722631 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
References
-
- Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, et al., eds. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2008 (based on November 2010 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER web site, 2011). Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/colorect.html#prevalence Accessed March 2, 2012
-
- Rea JD, Cone MM, Diggs BS, Deveney KE, Lu KC, Herzig DO. Utilization of laparoscopic colectomy in the United States before and after the clinical outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group trial. Annals Surg. 2011;254:281–288 - PubMed
-
- Steele SR, Brown TA, Rush RM, Martin MJ. Laparoscopic vs open colectomy for colon cancer: results from a large nationwide population-based analysis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2008;12:583–591 - PubMed
-
- Cima RR, Pendlimari R, Holubar SD, et al. Utility and short-term outcomes of hand-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a single-institution experience in 1103 patients. Dis Colon Rectum. 2011;54:1076–1081 - PubMed
-
- Singla A, Li Y, Ng SC, Csikesz NG, Tseng JF, Shah SA. Is the growth in laparoscopic surgery reproducible with more complex procedures? Surgery. 2009;146:367–374 - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources