Sujay Kulshrestha1, Haroon M Janjua2, Corinne Bunn3, Michael Rogers4, Christopher DuCoin4, Zaid M Abdelsattar5, Fred A Luchette6, Paul C Kuo2, Marshall S Baker6. 1. Department of Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL; Burn and Shock Trauma Research Institute, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, IL. Electronic address: sujay.kulshrestha@lumc.edu. 2. Department of Surgery, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL; OnetoMap Analytics, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL. 3. Department of Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL; Burn and Shock Trauma Research Institute, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, IL. 4. Department of Surgery, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL. 5. Depatment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL; Edward Hines, Jr Veterans Administration Hospital, Hines, IL. 6. Department of Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL; Edward Hines, Jr Veterans Administration Hospital, Hines, IL.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Published studies evaluating the effect of robotic assistance on clinical outcomes and costs of care in diaphragmatic hernia repair (DHR) have been limited. STUDY DESIGN: The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient and State Ambulatory Surgery and Services Databases for Florida were queried to identify patients undergoing transabdominal DHR between 2011 and 2018 and associated inpatient and outpatient encounters within 12 months after the index operation. Patients undergoing robotic DHR were 1:1:1 propensity score-matched for age, sex, race, Elixhauser comorbidity score, case priority, payer, and facility volume with patients undergoing open and laparoscopic DHR. RESULTS: There were 5,962 patients (67.3%) who underwent laparoscopic DHR, 1,520 (17.2%) who underwent open DHR, and 1,376 (15.5%) who underwent robotic DHR. On comparison of matched cohorts, median index length of stay (3 days; interquartile range [IQR] 2 to 5 days vs 2 days; IQR 1 to 4 days; p < 0.001) and index hospitalization costs ($17,236; IQR $13,231 to $22,183 vs $12,087; IQR $8,881 to $17,439; p < 0.001) for robotic DHR were greater than for laparoscopic DHR. Median length of stay for open DHR (6 days; IQR 4 to 10 days) was longer than that for both laparoscopic and robotic DHR. Median index hospitalization costs for open DHR ($16,470; IQR $11,152 to $23,768) were greater than those for laparoscopic DHR, but less than those for robotic DHR. There were no significant differences between cohorts in the overall rate of post-index care. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic DHR is the most cost-effective approach to DHR. Robotic assistance provides clinical outcomes comparable with laparoscopic DHR, but is associated with increased index cost.
BACKGROUND: Published studies evaluating the effect of robotic assistance on clinical outcomes and costs of care in diaphragmatic hernia repair (DHR) have been limited. STUDY DESIGN: The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient and State Ambulatory Surgery and Services Databases for Florida were queried to identify patients undergoing transabdominal DHR between 2011 and 2018 and associated inpatient and outpatient encounters within 12 months after the index operation. Patients undergoing robotic DHR were 1:1:1 propensity score-matched for age, sex, race, Elixhauser comorbidity score, case priority, payer, and facility volume with patients undergoing open and laparoscopic DHR. RESULTS: There were 5,962 patients (67.3%) who underwent laparoscopic DHR, 1,520 (17.2%) who underwent open DHR, and 1,376 (15.5%) who underwent robotic DHR. On comparison of matched cohorts, median index length of stay (3 days; interquartile range [IQR] 2 to 5 days vs 2 days; IQR 1 to 4 days; p < 0.001) and index hospitalization costs ($17,236; IQR $13,231 to $22,183 vs $12,087; IQR $8,881 to $17,439; p < 0.001) for robotic DHR were greater than for laparoscopic DHR. Median length of stay for open DHR (6 days; IQR 4 to 10 days) was longer than that for both laparoscopic and robotic DHR. Median index hospitalization costs for open DHR ($16,470; IQR $11,152 to $23,768) were greater than those for laparoscopic DHR, but less than those for robotic DHR. There were no significant differences between cohorts in the overall rate of post-index care. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic DHR is the most cost-effective approach to DHR. Robotic assistance provides clinical outcomes comparable with laparoscopic DHR, but is associated with increased index cost.
Authors: Geoffrey Paul Kohn; Raymond Richard Price; Steven R DeMeester; Jörg Zehetner; Oliver J Muensterer; Ziad Awad; Sumeet K Mittal; William S Richardson; Dimitrios Stefanidis; Robert D Fanelli Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-09-10 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: William D Gerull; Daniel Cho; Iris Kuo; Saeed Arefanian; Bradley S Kushner; Michael M Awad Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2020-08-03 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Basem G Soliman; Duc T Nguyen; Edward Y Chan; Ray K Chihara; Leonora M Meisenbach; Edward A Graviss; Min P Kim Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-08-05 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Hylke J F Brenkman; Kevin Parry; Richard van Hillegersberg; Jelle P Ruurda Journal: J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A Date: 2016-04-14 Impact factor: 1.878