OBJECTIVE: Pulmonary segmentectomy using robotic assistance is often perceived as being more expensive than segmentectomy using video-assisted thoracic surgery. The robotic technique allows for meticulous dissection during segmentectomy, potentially leading to fewer parenchymal injuries, fewer air leaks, and shorter length of stay. This study compared pulmonary segmentectomy costs using video-assisted thoracic surgery versus robotic with manual staplers versus robotic with robotic staplers. METHODS: Retrospective analyses were performed evaluating our early experience with robotic pulmonary segmentectomy for 30 months compared with the video-assisted thoracic surgery approach. All 50 anatomical segmentectomies performed since introduction of robotic technique in the practice were included. Twenty-eight procedures were robotic-assisted and 22 were video-assisted thoracic surgery. Procedure-specific evaluation of direct costs was performed, including cost of robotic instruments, staplers, and average length of stay in the hospital. RESULTS: The mean ± SD age was 70 ± 10 years (range = 43-91 years). There were 12 males in the robotic group and eight in the video-assisted thoracic surgery group (P = 0.642). The mean age was 69 years in the robotic group and 71 years in the video-assisted thoracic surgery group (P = 0.367). The median length of stay was 2 (2-4) days in the robotic group (range = 1-9) and 4 (2-5) days in the video-assisted thoracic surgery group (range = 1-20, P = 0.089). The cost of robotic segmentectomy with manual staplers was less than that with robotic staplers. Both robotic techniques cost less than video-assisted thoracic surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In this small series, cost and outcomes in our early experience with robotic-assisted segmentectomy were comparable with our video-assisted thoracic surgery approach with trends toward shorter length of stay and fewer complications. Larger series are needed to validate these results.
OBJECTIVE: Pulmonary segmentectomy using robotic assistance is often perceived as being more expensive than segmentectomy using video-assisted thoracic surgery. The robotic technique allows for meticulous dissection during segmentectomy, potentially leading to fewer parenchymal injuries, fewer air leaks, and shorter length of stay. This study compared pulmonary segmentectomy costs using video-assisted thoracic surgery versus robotic with manual staplers versus robotic with robotic staplers. METHODS: Retrospective analyses were performed evaluating our early experience with robotic pulmonary segmentectomy for 30 months compared with the video-assisted thoracic surgery approach. All 50 anatomical segmentectomies performed since introduction of robotic technique in the practice were included. Twenty-eight procedures were robotic-assisted and 22 were video-assisted thoracic surgery. Procedure-specific evaluation of direct costs was performed, including cost of robotic instruments, staplers, and average length of stay in the hospital. RESULTS: The mean ± SD age was 70 ± 10 years (range = 43-91 years). There were 12 males in the robotic group and eight in the video-assisted thoracic surgery group (P = 0.642). The mean age was 69 years in the robotic group and 71 years in the video-assisted thoracic surgery group (P = 0.367). The median length of stay was 2 (2-4) days in the robotic group (range = 1-9) and 4 (2-5) days in the video-assisted thoracic surgery group (range = 1-20, P = 0.089). The cost of robotic segmentectomy with manual staplers was less than that with robotic staplers. Both robotic techniques cost less than video-assisted thoracic surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In this small series, cost and outcomes in our early experience with robotic-assisted segmentectomy were comparable with our video-assisted thoracic surgery approach with trends toward shorter length of stay and fewer complications. Larger series are needed to validate these results.