Literature DB >> 27638218

Comparison of hospital charges between robotic, laparoscopic stapled, and laparoscopic handsewn Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

Myriam J Curet1, Myriam Curet2, Houman Solomon1, Gigi Lui1, John M Morton1.   

Abstract

The feasibility and safety of laparoscopic and robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RRYGB) have been established. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of robotic surgery we compared the hospital charges for robotic, laparoscopic stapled (SRYGB), and laparoscopic handsewn Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (HRYGB) at our institution. One hundred thirty-five consecutive patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass at Stanford University Medical Center by handsewn, stapled or robotic techniques from 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 were evaluated. Medical records of these patients were retrospectively reviewed and the following variables were collected and analyzed: age, gender, body mass index (BMI), number of preoperative comorbidities, length of stay (LOS), operating and anesthesia times, postoperative complications, mortality, professional fees, and hospital and total charges. Twenty-one RRYGB, 78 SRYGB, and 36 HRYGB were performed during the study period. Comparison of the above three groups demonstrated no statistically significant differences in age, gender, BMI, number of preoperative comorbidities, LOS, operating and anesthesia times, postoperative complications, mortality or professional fees. Total charges were higher for RRYGB (US $77,820) when compared with SRYGB (US $66,153) but not when compared with HRYGB (US $68,814). RRYGB higher hospital charges resulted in higher total charges when compared with SRYGB and HRYGB. These differences do not reflect actual cost to the hospital.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bariatric; Cost; Hospital charges; Laparoscopic; Robotics

Year:  2009        PMID: 27638218     DOI: 10.1007/s11701-009-0143-9

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


  19 in total

1.  The learning curve for laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is 100 cases.

Authors:  P Schauer; S Ikramuddin; G Hamad; W Gourash
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2002-12-04       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  Robotic abdominal surgery.

Authors:  Eric J Hanly; Mark A Talamini
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 2.565

3.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

Authors:  M R Ali; B Bhaskerrao; B M Wolfe
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-12-30       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication: a comparative retrospective study on costs and time consumption.

Authors:  Jeroen Heemskerk; Wim G van Gemert; Jan Willem M Greve; Nicole D Bouvy
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 1.719

5.  Use and outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastric bypass at academic medical centers.

Authors:  Ninh T Nguyen; Marcelo Hinojosa; Christine Fayad; Esteban Varela; Samuel E Wilson
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2007-06-27       Impact factor: 6.113

6.  Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) for base of tongue neoplasms.

Authors:  Bert W O'Malley; Gregory S Weinstein; Wendy Snyder; Neil G Hockstein
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.325

7.  Does robotic technology make minimally invasive cardiac surgery too expensive? A hospital cost analysis of robotic and conventional techniques.

Authors:  Jeffrey A Morgan; Barbara A Thornton; Joy C Peacock; Karen W Hollingsworth; Craig R Smith; Mehmet C Oz; Michael Argenziano
Journal:  J Card Surg       Date:  2005 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.620

8.  National Surgical Quality Improvement Program analysis of bariatric operations: modifiable risk factors contribute to bariatric surgical adverse outcomes.

Authors:  Edward H Livingston; David Arterburn; Tracy L Schifftner; William G Henderson; Ralph G DePalma
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2006-09-27       Impact factor: 6.113

Review 9.  Minimally invasive approaches to prostate cancer: a review of the current literature.

Authors:  Ari Abraham Hakimi; Marc Feder; Reza Ghavamian
Journal:  Urol J       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 1.510

10.  Robotic-assisted laparoscopy in gynecological surgery.

Authors:  Camran Nezhat; Naghmeh S Saberi; Babac Shahmohamady; Farr Nezhat
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2006 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.172

View more
  13 in total

1.  Technique evolution, learning curve, and outcomes of 200 robot-assisted gastric bypass procedures: a 5-year experience.

Authors:  Vivek Bindal; Raquel Gonzalez-Heredia; Mario Masrur; Enrique F Elli
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 4.129

Review 2.  Robotic vs. Laparoscopic Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Konstantinos P Economopoulos; Vasileios Theocharidis; Travis J McKenzie; Theodoros N Sergentanis; Theodora Psaltopoulou
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.129

Review 3.  The evolution of robotic bariatric surgery.

Authors:  Erik B Wilson; Ranjan Sudan
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Robot-assisted gastroesophageal surgery: usefulness and limitations.

Authors:  Ismael Diez Del Val; Cándido Martinez Blazquez; Carlos Loureiro Gonzalez; Jose Maria Vitores Lopez; Valentin Sierra Esteban; Julen Barrenetxea Asua; Izaskun Del Hoyo Aretxabala; Patricia Perez de Villarreal; Jose Esteban Bilbao Axpe; Jaime Jesus Mendez Martin
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2013-09-14

5.  SAGES TAVAC safety and effectiveness analysis: da Vinci ® Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA).

Authors:  Shawn Tsuda; Dmitry Oleynikov; Jon Gould; Dan Azagury; Bryan Sandler; Matthew Hutter; Sharona Ross; Eric Haas; Fred Brody; Richard Satava
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-07-24       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 6.  Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Kun Li; Jianan Zou; Jianxiong Tang; Jianzhong Di; Xiaodong Han; Pin Zhang
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 4.129

7.  Low confidence levels with the robotic platform among senior surgical residents: simulation training is needed.

Authors:  Francisco Schlottmann; Jason M Long; Sean Brown; Marco G Patti
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2018-08-11

8.  Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass for Morbid Obesity: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Lixia Wang; Liang Yao; Peijing Yan; Dongsheng Xie; Caiwen Han; Rong Liu; Kehu Yang; Tiankang Guo; Limin Tian
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 4.129

9.  Laparoscopic versus robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: lessons and long-term follow-up learned from a large prospective monocentric study.

Authors:  Nicolas C Buchs; Philippe Morel; Dan E Azagury; Minoa Jung; Gilles Chassot; Olivier Huber; Monika E Hagen; François Pugin
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 4.129

Review 10.  Robotic versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) in obese adults ages 18 to 65 years: a systematic review and economic analysis.

Authors:  Jonathan G Bailey; Jill A Hayden; Philip J B Davis; Richard Y Liu; David Haardt; James Ellsmere
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-10-03       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.