Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2017 Oct 24;318(16):1561-1568.
doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.14586.

Association of Robotic-Assisted vs Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy With Perioperative Outcomes and Health Care Costs, 2003 to 2015

In Gab Jeong  1   2 , Yash S Khandwala  1   3 , Jae Heon Kim  1 , Deok Hyun Han  1 , Shufeng Li  4 , Ye Wang  5 , Steven L Chang  6 , Benjamin I Chung  1
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Association of Robotic-Assisted vs Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy With Perioperative Outcomes and Health Care Costs, 2003 to 2015

In Gab Jeong et al. JAMA. .

Abstract

Importance: Use of robotic surgery has increased in urological practice over the last decade. However, the use, outcomes, and costs of robotic nephrectomy are unknown.

Objectives: To examine the trend in use of robotic-assisted operations for radical nephrectomy in the United States and to compare the perioperative outcomes and costs with laparoscopic radical nephrectomy.

Design, setting, and participants: This retrospective cohort study used the Premier Healthcare database to evaluate outcomes of patients who had undergone robotic-assisted or laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal mass at 416 US hospitals between January 2003 and September 2015. Multivariable regression modeling was used to assess outcomes.

Exposures: Robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic radical nephrectomy.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome of the study was the trend in use of robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy. The secondary outcomes were perioperative complications, based on the Clavien classification system, and defined as any complication (Clavien grades 1-5) or major complications (Clavien grades 3-5, for which grade 5 results in death); resource use (operating time, blood transfusion, length of hospital stay); and direct hospital cost.

Results: Among 23 753 patients included in the study (mean age, 61.4 years; men, 13 792 [58.1%]), 18 573 underwent laparoscopic radical nephrectomy and 5180 underwent robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy. Use of robotic-assisted surgery increased from 1.5% (39 of 2676 radical nephrectomy procedures in 2003) to 27.0% (862 of 3194 radical nephrectomy procedures) in 2015 (P for trend <.001). In the weighted-adjusted analysis, there were no significant differences between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic radical nephrectomy in the incidence of any (Clavien grades 1-5) postoperative complications (adjusted rates, 22.2% vs 23.4%, difference, -1.2%; 95% CI, -5.4 to 3.0%) or major (Clavien grades 3-5) complications (adjusted rates, 3.5% vs 3.8%, difference, -0.3%; 95% CI, -1.0% to 0.5%). The rate of prolonged operating time (>4 hours) for patients undergoing the robotic-assisted procedure was higher than for patients receiving the laparoscopic procedure in the adjusted analysis (46.3% vs 25.8%; risk difference, 20.5%; 95% CI, 14.2% to 26.8%). Robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy was associated with higher mean 90-day direct hospital costs ($19 530 vs $16 851; difference, $2678; 95% CI, $838 to $4519), mainly accounted for operating room ($7217 vs $5378; difference, $1839; 95% CI, $1050 to $2628) and supply costs ($4876 vs $3891; difference, $985; 95% CI, $473 to $1498).

Conclusions and relevance: Among patients undergoing radical nephrectomy for renal mass between 2003 and 2015, the use of robotic-assisted surgery increased substantially. The use of robotic-assistance was not associated with increased risk of any or major complications but was associated with prolonged operating time and higher hospital costs compared with laparoscopic surgery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: All authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Dr Chung reported personal fees from Intuitive Surgical. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure.
Figure.. Trends of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic-Assisted Radical Nephrectomy in the United States, 2003 to 2015
Numbers below each year represent the total number of patients receiving radical nephrectomy.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Van Poppel H, Becker F, Cadeddu JA, et al. . Treatment of localised renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol. 2011;60(4):662-672. - PubMed
    1. Dunn MD, Portis AJ, Shalhav AL, et al. . Laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy: a 9-year experience. J Urol. 2000;164(4):1153-1159. - PubMed
    1. Permpongkosol S, Chan DY, Link RE, et al. . Long-term survival analysis after laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. J Urol. 2005;174(4 pt 1):1222-1225. - PubMed
    1. Schiavone MB, Kuo EC, Naumann RW, et al. . The commercialization of robotic surgery: unsubstantiated marketing of gynecologic surgery by hospitals. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;207(3):174.e1-174.e7. - PubMed
    1. Wright JD, Tergas AI, Hou JY, et al. . Effect of regional hospital competition and hospital financial status on the use of robotic-assisted surgery. JAMA Surg. 2016;151(7):612-620. - PubMed

Publication types