Literature DB >> 31558306

The paradox of the robotic approach to inguinal hernia repair in the inpatient setting.

Haroon Janjua, Evelena Cousin-Peterson, Tara M Barry, Marissa C Kuo, Marshall S Baker, Paul C Kuo.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Robotics offers improved ergonomics, enhanced visualization, and increased dexterity. Disadvantages include startup, maintenance and instrument costs. Surgeon education notwithstanding, we hypothesized that robotic inguinal hernia repair carries minimal advantages over the open or laparoscopic approach in the inpatient setting.
METHODS: The HCUP-SID and AHA datasets were queried for inguinal hernia repair codes. Hospital and patient demographic, financial and comorbidity data were evaluated. Data are presented as mean ± SEM.
RESULTS: 36396 cases (27776 Open, 7104 Laparoscopic and 1516 Robotic) were identified. Total costs were: $13595 ± 104 (Open), $13581 ± 176 (Laparoscopic) and $18494 ± 323 (Robotic). (p < 0.0001 Robotic vs Open, Robotic vs Laparoscopic) Robotic costs were 38% greater than that of the Open and Laparoscopic subsets (p < 0.001 Robotic vs. Open and Laparoscopic). The Open, Laparoscopic and Robotic subsets' length of stay were 4.2, 3.2 and 2.3 days, respectively. (p < 0.0001 among Open, Laparoscopic and Robotic).
CONCLUSION: The Robotic approach to the inguinal hernia repair had the lowest length of stay, despite having the highest costs. The benefits of robotic surgery in inguinal hernia repair are unclear in the inpatient setting.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Inguinal hernia; Inpatient; Laparoscopic; Open; Robotic

Year:  2019        PMID: 31558306     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2019.09.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Surg        ISSN: 0002-9610            Impact factor:   2.565


  7 in total

Review 1.  Robot-assisted groin hernia repair is primarily performed by specialized surgeons: a scoping review.

Authors:  Danni Lip Hansen; Anders Gram-Hanssen; Siv Fonnes; Jacob Rosenberg
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2022-07-05

Review 2.  Spin is present in the majority of articles evaluating robot-assisted groin hernia repair: a systematic review.

Authors:  Danni Lip Hansen; Siv Fonnes; Jacob Rosenberg
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Robotic Surgery: At the Crossroads of a Data Explosion.

Authors:  Tejinder P Singh; Jessica Zaman; Jessica Cutler
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2021-10-11       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Does adoption of new technology increase surgical volume? The robotic inguinal hernia repair model.

Authors:  Tara M Barry; Haroon Janjua; Christopher DuCoin; Emanuel Eguia; Paul C Kuo
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2021-09-13

5.  Intelligent, Autonomous Machines in Surgery.

Authors:  Tyler J Loftus; Amanda C Filiberto; Jeremy Balch; Alexander L Ayzengart; Patrick J Tighe; Parisa Rashidi; Azra Bihorac; Gilbert R Upchurch
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2020-04-24       Impact factor: 2.192

6.  Preliminary results of robotic inguinal hernia repair following its introduction in a single-center trial.

Authors:  Takuya Saito; Yasuyuki Fukami; Tairin Uchino; Shintaro Kurahashi; Tatsuki Matsumura; Takaaki Osawa; Takashi Arikawa; Shunichiro Komatsu; Kenitiro Kaneko; Tsuyoshi Sano
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol Surg       Date:  2020-06-04

7.  Robotic Inguinal Hernia Repair Outcomes: Operative Time and Cost Analysis.

Authors:  Morcos A Awad; Jarrod Buzalewski; Cooper Anderson; James T Dove; Ashley Soloski; Nicole E Sharp; Bogdan Protyniak; Mohsen M Shabahang
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2020 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.172

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.