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
. 2019 Aug;33(8):2591-2601.
doi: 10.1007/s00464-018-6554-9. Epub 2018 Oct 24.

Robotic surgery trends in general surgical oncology from the National Inpatient Sample

Affiliations

Robotic surgery trends in general surgical oncology from the National Inpatient Sample

Camille L Stewart et al. Surg Endosc. 2019 Aug.

Abstract

Background: Robotic surgery is offered at most major medical institutions. The extent of its use within general surgical oncology, however, is poorly understood. We hypothesized that robotic surgery adoption in surgical oncology is increasing annually, that is occurring in all surgical sites, and all regions of the US.

Study design: We identified patients with site-specific malignancies treated with surgical resection from the National Inpatient Sample 2010-2014 databases. Operations were considered robotic if any ICD-9-CM robotic procedure code was used.

Results: We identified 147,259 patients representing the following sites: esophageal (3%), stomach (5%), small bowel (5%), pancreas (7%), liver (5%), and colorectal (75%). Most operations were open (71%), followed by laparoscopic (26%), and robotic (3%). In 2010, only 1.1% of operations were robotic; over the 5-year study period, there was a 5.0-fold increase in robotic surgery, compared to 1.1-fold increase in laparoscopy and 1.2-fold decrease in open surgery (< 0.001). These trends were observed for all surgical sites and in all regions of the US, they were strongest for esophageal and colorectal operations, and in the Northeast. Adjusting for age and comorbidities, odds of having a robotic operation increased annually (5.6 times more likely by 2014), with similar length of stay (6.9 ± 6.5 vs 7.0 ± 6.5, p = 0.52) and rate of complications (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83-1.01, p = 0.08) compared to laparoscopy.

Conclusions: Robotic surgery as a platform for minimally invasive surgery is increasing over time for oncologic operations. The growing use of robotic surgery will affect surgical oncology practice in the future, warranting further study of its impact on cost, outcomes, and surgical training.

Keywords: Minimally invasive surgery; National Inpatient Sample; Robotic surgery.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Updates Surg. 2015 Sep;67(3):257-64 - PubMed
    1. J Robot Surg. 2013 Sep;7(3):305-8 - PubMed
    1. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2013 Jun;28(6):815-21 - PubMed
    1. HPB (Oxford). 2017 Sep;19(9):818-824 - PubMed
    1. Lancet Oncol. 2013 Mar;14(3):210-8 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources