In Gab Jeong1,2, Yash S Khandwala1,3, Jae Heon Kim1, Deok Hyun Han1, Shufeng Li4, Ye Wang5, Steven L Chang6, Benjamin I Chung1. 1. Department of Urology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, California. 2. Department of Urology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 3. University of California, San Diego School of Medicine. 4. Department of Urology and Dermatology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, California. 5. Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 6. Division of Urology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Use of robotic surgery has increased in urological practice over the last decade. However, the use, outcomes, and costs of robotic nephrectomy are unknown. OBJECTIVES: To examine the trend in use of robotic-assisted operations for radical nephrectomy in the United States and to compare the perioperative outcomes and costs with laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study used the Premier Healthcare database to evaluate outcomes of patients who had undergone robotic-assisted or laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal mass at 416 US hospitals between January 2003 and September 2015. Multivariable regression modeling was used to assess outcomes. EXPOSURES: Robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome of the study was the trend in use of robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy. The secondary outcomes were perioperative complications, based on the Clavien classification system, and defined as any complication (Clavien grades 1-5) or major complications (Clavien grades 3-5, for which grade 5 results in death); resource use (operating time, blood transfusion, length of hospital stay); and direct hospital cost. RESULTS: Among 23 753 patients included in the study (mean age, 61.4 years; men, 13 792 [58.1%]), 18 573 underwent laparoscopic radical nephrectomy and 5180 underwent robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy. Use of robotic-assisted surgery increased from 1.5% (39 of 2676 radical nephrectomy procedures in 2003) to 27.0% (862 of 3194 radical nephrectomy procedures) in 2015 (P for trend <.001). In the weighted-adjusted analysis, there were no significant differences between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic radical nephrectomy in the incidence of any (Clavien grades 1-5) postoperative complications (adjusted rates, 22.2% vs 23.4%, difference, -1.2%; 95% CI, -5.4 to 3.0%) or major (Clavien grades 3-5) complications (adjusted rates, 3.5% vs 3.8%, difference, -0.3%; 95% CI, -1.0% to 0.5%). The rate of prolonged operating time (>4 hours) for patients undergoing the robotic-assisted procedure was higher than for patients receiving the laparoscopic procedure in the adjusted analysis (46.3% vs 25.8%; risk difference, 20.5%; 95% CI, 14.2% to 26.8%). Robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy was associated with higher mean 90-day direct hospital costs ($19 530 vs $16 851; difference, $2678; 95% CI, $838 to $4519), mainly accounted for operating room ($7217 vs $5378; difference, $1839; 95% CI, $1050 to $2628) and supply costs ($4876 vs $3891; difference, $985; 95% CI, $473 to $1498). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients undergoing radical nephrectomy for renal mass between 2003 and 2015, the use of robotic-assisted surgery increased substantially. The use of robotic-assistance was not associated with increased risk of any or major complications but was associated with prolonged operating time and higher hospital costs compared with laparoscopic surgery.
IMPORTANCE: Use of robotic surgery has increased in urological practice over the last decade. However, the use, outcomes, and costs of robotic nephrectomy are unknown. OBJECTIVES: To examine the trend in use of robotic-assisted operations for radical nephrectomy in the United States and to compare the perioperative outcomes and costs with laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study used the Premier Healthcare database to evaluate outcomes of patients who had undergone robotic-assisted or laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal mass at 416 US hospitals between January 2003 and September 2015. Multivariable regression modeling was used to assess outcomes. EXPOSURES: Robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome of the study was the trend in use of robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy. The secondary outcomes were perioperative complications, based on the Clavien classification system, and defined as any complication (Clavien grades 1-5) or major complications (Clavien grades 3-5, for which grade 5 results in death); resource use (operating time, blood transfusion, length of hospital stay); and direct hospital cost. RESULTS: Among 23 753 patients included in the study (mean age, 61.4 years; men, 13 792 [58.1%]), 18 573 underwent laparoscopic radical nephrectomy and 5180 underwent robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy. Use of robotic-assisted surgery increased from 1.5% (39 of 2676 radical nephrectomy procedures in 2003) to 27.0% (862 of 3194 radical nephrectomy procedures) in 2015 (P for trend <.001). In the weighted-adjusted analysis, there were no significant differences between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic radical nephrectomy in the incidence of any (Clavien grades 1-5) postoperative complications (adjusted rates, 22.2% vs 23.4%, difference, -1.2%; 95% CI, -5.4 to 3.0%) or major (Clavien grades 3-5) complications (adjusted rates, 3.5% vs 3.8%, difference, -0.3%; 95% CI, -1.0% to 0.5%). The rate of prolonged operating time (>4 hours) for patients undergoing the robotic-assisted procedure was higher than for patients receiving the laparoscopic procedure in the adjusted analysis (46.3% vs 25.8%; risk difference, 20.5%; 95% CI, 14.2% to 26.8%). Robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy was associated with higher mean 90-day direct hospital costs ($19 530 vs $16 851; difference, $2678; 95% CI, $838 to $4519), mainly accounted for operating room ($7217 vs $5378; difference, $1839; 95% CI, $1050 to $2628) and supply costs ($4876 vs $3891; difference, $985; 95% CI, $473 to $1498). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients undergoing radical nephrectomy for renal mass between 2003 and 2015, the use of robotic-assisted surgery increased substantially. The use of robotic-assistance was not associated with increased risk of any or major complications but was associated with prolonged operating time and higher hospital costs compared with laparoscopic surgery.
Authors: Önder Kara; Matthew J Maurice; Pascal Mouracade; Ercan Malkoç; Julien Dagenais; Ryan J Nelson; Jaya Sai S Chavali; Robert J Stein; Amr Fergany; Jihad H Kaouk Journal: J Urol Date: 2017-01-10 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Jason D Wright; William M Burke; Elizabeth T Wilde; Sharyn N Lewin; Abigail S Charles; Jin Hee Kim; Noah Goldman; Alfred I Neugut; Thomas J Herzog; Dawn L Hershman Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-01-30 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: David M Golombos; Bilal Chughtai; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Jialin Mao; Alexis Te; Padraic O'Malley; Douglas S Scherr; Joseph Del Pizzo; Jim C Hu; Art Sedrakyan Journal: J Endourol Date: 2016-11-30 Impact factor: 2.942
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
Authors: Hiten D Patel; Jeffrey K Mullins; Phillip M Pierorazio; Gautam Jayram; Jason E Cohen; Brian R Matlaga; Mohamad E Allaf Journal: J Urol Date: 2012-10-17 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Alberto Breda; Antonio Finelli; Gunter Janetschek; Francesco Porpiglia; Francesco Montorsi Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2009-01-20 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Parth K Modi; Brent K Hollenbeck; Mary Oerline; Alon Z Weizer; Jeffrey S Montgomery; Samuel D Kaffenberger; Andrew M Ryan; Chad Ellimoottil Journal: Urology Date: 2018-10-23 Impact factor: 2.649