Giorgio Bogani1, Francesco Multinu1, Sean C Dowdy1, William A Cliby1, Timothy O Wilson1, Bobbie S Gostout1, Amy L Weaver2, Bijan J Borah3, Jill M Killian2, Akash Bijlani4, Stefano Angioni5, Andrea Mariani6. 1. Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States. 2. Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States. 3. Division of Health Care Policy and Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States. 4. Strategy Access Solutions, San Carlos, CA, United States. 5. Division of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy. 6. Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States. Electronic address: mariani.andrea@mayo.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how the introduction of robotic-assisted surgery affects treatment-related morbidity and cost of endometrial cancer (EC) staging. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of consecutive patients with stage I-III EC undergoing surgical staging between 2007 and 2012 at our institution. Costs (from surgery to 30days after surgery) were set based on the Medicare cost-to-charge ratio for each year and inflated to 2014 values. Inverse probability weighting (IPW) was used to decrease the allocation bias when comparing outcomes between surgical groups. RESULTS: We focused our analysis on the 251 EC patients who had robotic-assisted surgery and the 384 who had open staging. During the study period, the use of robotic-assisted surgery increased and open staging decreased (P<0.001). Correcting group imbalances by using IPW methodology, we observed that patients undergoing robotic-assisted staging had a significantly lower postoperative complication rate, lower blood transfusion rate, longer median operating time, shorter median length of stay, and lower readmission rate than patients undergoing open staging (all P<0.001). Overall 30-day costs were similar between the 2 groups, with robotic-assisted surgery having significantly higher median operating room costs ($2820 difference; P<0.001) but lower median room and board costs ($2929 difference; P<0.001) than open surgery. Increasing experience with robotic-assisted staging was significantly associated with a decrease in median operating time (P=0.002) and length of stay (P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of robotic-assisted surgery for EC staging improves patient outcomes. It provides women the benefits of minimally invasive surgery without increasing costs and potentially improves patient turnover.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how the introduction of robotic-assisted surgery affects treatment-related morbidity and cost of endometrial cancer (EC) staging. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of consecutive patients with stage I-III EC undergoing surgical staging between 2007 and 2012 at our institution. Costs (from surgery to 30days after surgery) were set based on the Medicare cost-to-charge ratio for each year and inflated to 2014 values. Inverse probability weighting (IPW) was used to decrease the allocation bias when comparing outcomes between surgical groups. RESULTS: We focused our analysis on the 251 EC patients who had robotic-assisted surgery and the 384 who had open staging. During the study period, the use of robotic-assisted surgery increased and open staging decreased (P<0.001). Correcting group imbalances by using IPW methodology, we observed that patients undergoing robotic-assisted staging had a significantly lower postoperative complication rate, lower blood transfusion rate, longer median operating time, shorter median length of stay, and lower readmission rate than patients undergoing open staging (all P<0.001). Overall 30-day costs were similar between the 2 groups, with robotic-assisted surgery having significantly higher median operating room costs ($2820 difference; P<0.001) but lower median room and board costs ($2929 difference; P<0.001) than open surgery. Increasing experience with robotic-assisted staging was significantly associated with a decrease in median operating time (P=0.002) and length of stay (P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of robotic-assisted surgery for EC staging improves patient outcomes. It provides women the benefits of minimally invasive surgery without increasing costs and potentially improves patient turnover.
Authors: Paulina Cybulska; Maria B Schiavone; Brandon Sawyer; Ginger J Gardner; Oliver Zivanovic; Carol L Brown; Elizabeth L Jewell; Yukio Sonoda; Richard R Barakat; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Mario M Leitao Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2017-09-22 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Rudy S Suidan; Weiguo He; Charlotte C Sun; Hui Zhao; Nicole D Fleming; Pedro T Ramirez; Pamela T Soliman; Shannon N Westin; Karen H Lu; Sharon H Giordano; Larissa A Meyer Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2017-01-26 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Jeremie Abitbol; Beste Kucukyazici; Sonya Brin; Susie Lau; Shannon Salvador; Agnihotram V Ramanakumar; Roy Kessous; Liron Kogan; John D Fletcher; Valerie Pare-Miron; Gilbert Liu; Walter H Gotlieb Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2022-08-04
Authors: Jvan Casarin; Francesco Multinu; Nadeem Abu-Rustum; David Cibula; William A Cliby; Fabio Ghezzi; Mario Leitao; Ikuo Konishi; Joo-Hyun Nam; Denis Querleu; Pamela T Soliman; Kathleen J Yost; Amy L Weaver; Andrea Mariani; Gretchen E Glaser Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Angeline Favre; Stephanie Huberlant; Marie Carbonnel; Julie Goetgheluck; Aurelie Revaux; Jean Marc Ayoubi Journal: Front Surg Date: 2016-11-02
Authors: Kristin Bixel; David A Barrington; Monica H Vetter; Adrian A Suarez; Ashley S Felix Journal: J Minim Invasive Gynecol Date: 2021-08-01 Impact factor: 4.137