Literature DB >> 27153838

Efficacy and cost of robotic hepatectomy: is the robot cost-prohibitive?

Jonathan G Sham1, Morgan K Richards2, Y David Seo2, Venu G Pillarisetty2, Raymond S Yeung2, James O Park2.   

Abstract

Robotic technology is being utilized in multiple hepatobiliary procedures, including hepatic resections. The benefits of minimally invasive surgical approaches have been well documented; however, there is some concern that robotic liver surgery may be prohibitively costly and therefore should be limited on this basis. A single-institution, retrospective cohort study was performed of robotic and open liver resections performed for benign and malignant pathologies. Clinical and cost outcomes were analyzed using adjusted generalized linear regression models. Clinical and cost data for 71 robotic (RH) and 88 open (OH) hepatectomies were analyzed. Operative time was significantly longer in the RH group (303 vs. 253 min; p = 0.004). Length of stay was more than 2 days shorter in the RH group (4.2 vs. 6.5 days; p < 0.001). RH perioperative costs were higher ($6026 vs. $5479; p = 0.047); however, postoperative costs were significantly lower, resulting in lower total hospital direct costs compared with OH controls ($14,754 vs. $18,998; p = 0.001). Robotic assistance is safe and effective while performing major and minor liver resections. Despite increased perioperative costs, overall RH direct costs are not greater than OH, the current standard of care.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Hepatectomy; Robotic surgery; Surgical costs

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27153838     DOI: 10.1007/s11701-016-0598-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Robot Surg        ISSN: 1863-2483


  34 in total

1.  Robotic liver surgery: results for 70 resections.

Authors:  Pier Cristoforo Giulianotti; Andrea Coratti; Fabio Sbrana; Pietro Addeo; Francesco Maria Bianco; Nicolas Christian Buchs; Mario Annechiarico; Enrico Benedetti
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 3.982

2.  Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic and robot-assisted major hepatectomies: an Italian multi-institutional comparative study.

Authors:  Marcello Giuseppe Spampinato; Andrea Coratti; Luigi Bianco; Fabio Caniglia; Andrea Laurenzi; Francesco Puleo; Giuseppe Maria Ettorre; Ugo Boggi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-05-23       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Cost comparison of robotic, video-assisted thoracic surgery and thoracotomy approaches to pulmonary lobectomy.

Authors:  Bernard J Park; Raja M Flores
Journal:  Thorac Surg Clin       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 1.750

4.  Robotic versus laparoscopic liver resection: a comparative study from a single center.

Authors:  Young-Dong Yu; Ki-Hun Kim; Dong-Hwan Jung; Jung-Man Namkoong; Sam-Youl Yoon; Sung-Won Jung; Sang-Kyung Lee; Sung-Gyu Lee
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2014-11-04       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 5.  The learning curve in laparoscopic major liver resection.

Authors:  Michael D Kluger; Luca Vigano; Ryan Barroso; Daniel Cherqui
Journal:  J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 7.027

6.  Traditional versus robot-assisted full laparoscopic liver resection: a matched-pair comparative study.

Authors:  Hadrien Tranchart; Cecilia Ceribelli; Stefano Ferretti; Ibrahim Dagher; Alberto Patriti
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Robotically assisted vs laparoscopic hysterectomy among women with benign gynecologic disease.

Authors:  Jason D Wright; Cande V Ananth; Sharyn N Lewin; William M Burke; Yu-Shiang Lu; Alfred I Neugut; Thomas J Herzog; Dawn L Hershman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2013-02-20       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer.

Authors:  Heidi Nelson; Daniel J Sargent; H Sam Wieand; James Fleshman; Mehran Anvari; Steven J Stryker; Robert W Beart; Michael Hellinger; Richard Flanagan; Walter Peters; David Ota
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-05-13       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  The international position on laparoscopic liver surgery: The Louisville Statement, 2008.

Authors:  Joseph F Buell; Daniel Cherqui; David A Geller; Nicholas O'Rourke; David Iannitti; Ibrahim Dagher; Alan J Koffron; Mark Thomas; Brice Gayet; Ho Seong Han; Go Wakabayashi; Giulio Belli; Hironori Kaneko; Chen-Guo Ker; Olivier Scatton; Alexis Laurent; Eddie K Abdalla; Prosanto Chaudhury; Erik Dutson; Clark Gamblin; Michael D'Angelica; David Nagorney; Giuliano Testa; Daniel Labow; Derrik Manas; Ronnie T Poon; Heidi Nelson; Robert Martin; Bryan Clary; Wright C Pinson; John Martinie; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Robert Goldstein; Sasan Roayaie; David Barlet; Joseph Espat; Michael Abecassis; Myrddin Rees; Yuman Fong; Kelly M McMasters; Christoph Broelsch; Ron Busuttil; Jacques Belghiti; Steven Strasberg; Ravi S Chari
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 10.  World review of laparoscopic liver resection-2,804 patients.

Authors:  Kevin Tri Nguyen; T Clark Gamblin; David A Geller
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 12.969

View more
  19 in total

1.  Learning Curve in Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Liver Resection.

Authors:  Peng Zhu; Wei Liao; Ze-Yang Ding; Lin Chen; Wan-Guang Zhang; Bi-Xiang Zhang; Xiao-Ping Chen
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2018-11-07       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  Minimally invasive liver resection in the era of robotics: analysis of 214 cases.

Authors:  Alejandro Mejia; Stephen S Cheng; Elaina Vivian; Jimmy Shah; Hellen Oduor; Priyanka Archarya
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Economic analysis of open versus laparoscopic versus robotic hepatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ioannis A Ziogas; Alexandros P Evangeliou; Konstantinos S Mylonas; Dimitrios I Athanasiadis; Panagiotis Cherouveim; David A Geller; Richard D Schulick; Sophoclis P Alexopoulos; Georgios Tsoulfas
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2021-03-19

Review 4.  Robotic gastrointestinal surgery: learning curve, educational programs and outcomes.

Authors:  Charles C Vining; Kinga B Skowron; Melissa E Hogg
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2021-01-23

Review 5.  Setting up a robotic hepatectomy program: a Western-European experience and perspective.

Authors:  Carolijn L Nota; Inne H Borel Rinkes; Jeroen Hagendoorn
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 7.293

Review 6.  Value-based assessment of robotic pancreas and liver surgery.

Authors:  James C Patti; Ana Sofia Ore; Courtney Barrows; Vic Velanovich; A James Moser
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 7.293

7.  Evolution of a laparoscopic liver resection program: an analysis of 203 cases.

Authors:  Mohammed Elshamy; Hideo Takahashi; Muhammet Akyuz; Pinar Yazici; Hakan Yigitbas; Abdulrahman Y Hammad; Federico N Aucejo; Cristiano Quintini; John Fung; Eren Berber
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-03-31       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Comparative Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive Surgery and Conventional Approaches for Major or Challenging Hepatectomy.

Authors:  Lucas W Thornblade; Xu Shi; Alex Ruiz; David R Flum; James O Park
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2017-02-03       Impact factor: 6.113

9.  Oncological and surgical result of hepatoma after robot surgery.

Authors:  Wen-Hsiuan Wang; Kung-Kai Kuo; Shen-Nien Wang; King-Teh Lee
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Robotic hepatic parenchymal transection: a two-surgeon technique using ultrasonic dissection and irrigated bipolar coagulation.

Authors:  Antoine Camerlo; Cloé Magallon; Charles Vanbrugghe; Laurent Chiche; Chloé Gaudon; Yves Rinaldi; Régis Fara
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2020-08-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.