Literature DB >> 25167378

The financial impact of robotic technology for partial and radical nephrectomy.

Max Kates1, Mark W Ball, Hiten D Patel, Michael A Gorin, Phillip M Pierorazio, Mohamad E Allaf.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We sought to evaluate the financial impact of robotic technology for partial nephrectomy (PN) and radical nephrectomy (RN) in the state of Maryland.
METHODS: The Maryland Health Services Cost Review Commission (HSCRC) documents all acute care hospital charges data. This database was queried for patients who underwent laparoscopic or robot-assisted RN and PN from 2008 to 2012. Total hospital charge, subcharge, and length of stay (LOS) were analyzed separately for RN and PN.
RESULTS: Overall, 2834 patients were identified. Of those, 282 were laparoscopic PN (LPN), 1078 robot-assisted PN (RPN), 1098 laparoscopic RN (LRN), and 376 robot-assisted RN (RRN). For PN, the total hospital charge was $19,062 for LPN and $18,255 for RPN (P=0.138), with a charge savings of $807 per case in favor of robotics. For RN, the total hospital charge was $23,391 for RRN and $18,280 for LRN (P=0.004), with a charge premium of $5111 for robotic cases. LOS was shorter for RPN compared with LPN (2.51 vs 2.99 days, P<0.0001) and for RRN compared with LRN (3.52 vs 3.98, P=0.0498).
CONCLUSIONS: RPN is associated with lower hospital charges than LPN, while RRN is associated with higher hospital charges than LRN. Savings for RPN are driven by decreased room and board charge, while the premium for RRN is driven by higher operating room and supply charges. Because RRN use is increasing, the financial implications of RRN use for routine cases warrants further study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25167378     DOI: 10.1089/end.2014.0559

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endourol        ISSN: 0892-7790            Impact factor:   2.942


  7 in total

1.  Robotic adrenalectomy: the jury is still out.

Authors:  Mark W Ball; Mohamad E Allaf
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2015-08

2.  Cost-effectiveness of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for the prevention of perioperative complications.

Authors:  Stephan Buse; Carolin E Hach; Phillip Klumpen; Assen Alexandrov; Rene Mager; Alexandre Mottrie; Axel Haferkamp
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-12-12       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 3.  Robotic Primary RPLND for Stage I Testicular Cancer: a Review of Indications and Outcomes.

Authors:  Heather J Chalfin; Wesley Ludwig; Phillip M Pierorazio; Mohamad E Allaf
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 3.092

4.  Population-based analysis of cost and peri-operative outcomes between open and robotic primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for germ cell tumors.

Authors:  Raj Bhanvadia; Caleb Ashbrook; Aditya Bagrodia; Yair Lotan; Vitaly Margulis; Solomon Woldu
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2020-08-14       Impact factor: 4.226

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

Authors:  In Gab Jeong; Yash S Khandwala; Jae Heon Kim; Deok Hyun Han; Shufeng Li; Ye Wang; Steven L Chang; Benjamin I Chung
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 6.  A Review of Outcomes and Technique for the Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection for Testicular Cancer.

Authors:  Zeyad R Schwen; Mohit Gupta; Phillip M Pierorazio
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2018-05-03

7.  Editorial: Optimizing surgical procedures in renal cancers to improve patient outcomes.

Authors:  Hiten D Patel; Arnav Srivastava
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-09-27       Impact factor: 5.738

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.