Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy 12/2016

28.04.2016

Clinical outcomes and cost–benefit analysis comparing laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries

verfasst von: Vanitha Vasudevan, Ryan Reusche, Hannah Wallace, Srinivas Kaza

Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy | Ausgabe 12/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

The introduction of minimally invasive platforms for colorectal surgery—laparoscopy and more recently robotics—allows for smaller incisions, shortened hospital stay, less postoperative pain, and quicker return to normal activity. There exists a lack of evidence-based knowledge comparing the clinical outcomes and cost–benefit analysis of the different types of minimally invasive surgery. The aim of this study was to analyze and compare the short-term clinical outcomes and overall hospital costs between laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery.

Methods

After IRB approval, we conducted a retrospective chart review from 131 patients who underwent laparoscopic colorectal surgery and 96 patients who underwent robotic colorectal surgery. Data analyzed included pertinent patient demographics, operative times (OR times), conversion rates, postoperative pathology, complications, length of hospital stay, 90-day readmission rates, 30-day mortality, and overall hospital costs.

Results

Two hundred and twenty-seven patients were included—laparoscopic (N = 131) and robotic (N = 96) colorectal surgeries. Mean age of patients in the laparoscopic versus robotic cohort was 70.9 vs 63.6 years, (p < 0.001). Around 62 % were operated on for malignant disease. Mean OR time was 113 min for laparoscopy and 109 min for robotics, p = 0.59. Conversion rates were comparable. Mean length of hospital stay (6.6 vs 5.7 days) and postoperative complications (3.2 vs 7 %) were comparable between the laparoscopic and robotic arms. Overall hospital charges were $114,853 for laparoscopy and $107,220 for robotics, and no significant difference was noted (p = 0.448, NS).

Conclusion

Robotic colectomies were comparable to laparoscopic colectomies in terms of overall hospital charges and short-term clinical outcomes, including length of stay and conversion rates. Robotic surgery was favored for left-sided colectomy. With shorter learning curves and wider availability, robotic approach offers a safe and economically feasible minimally invasive platform for complex colorectal resections.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Bonnor RM, Ludwig KA (2005) Laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer: comparable to conventional oncologic surgery? Clin Colon Rectal Surg 18(3):174–181CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bonnor RM, Ludwig KA (2005) Laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer: comparable to conventional oncologic surgery? Clin Colon Rectal Surg 18(3):174–181CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Fleshman J, Sargent DJ, Green E, Anvari M, Stryker SJ, Beart RW Jr, Hellinger M, Flanagan R Jr, Peters W, Nelson H (2007) The clinical outcomes of surgical therapy study group. Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on 5-year data from the COST Study Group trial. Ann Surg 246(4):655–662CrossRefPubMed Fleshman J, Sargent DJ, Green E, Anvari M, Stryker SJ, Beart RW Jr, Hellinger M, Flanagan R Jr, Peters W, Nelson H (2007) The clinical outcomes of surgical therapy study group. Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on 5-year data from the COST Study Group trial. Ann Surg 246(4):655–662CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Petrucciani Niccolò, Sirimarco Dario, Nigri Giuseppe R, Magistri Paolo, La Torre Marco, Aurello Paolo, D’Angelo Francesco (2015) Giovanni RamacciatoRobotic right colectomy: a worthwhile procedure? Results of a meta-analysis of trials comparing robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy. J Minim Access Surg 11(1):22–28CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Petrucciani Niccolò, Sirimarco Dario, Nigri Giuseppe R, Magistri Paolo, La Torre Marco, Aurello Paolo, D’Angelo Francesco (2015) Giovanni RamacciatoRobotic right colectomy: a worthwhile procedure? Results of a meta-analysis of trials comparing robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy. J Minim Access Surg 11(1):22–28CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Rondelli F, Trastulli S, Avenia N, Schillaci G, Cirocchi R, Gullà N et al (2012) Is laparoscopic right colectomy more effective than open resection? A meta-analysis of randomized and nonrandomized studies. Colorectal Dis 14:e447–e469CrossRefPubMed Rondelli F, Trastulli S, Avenia N, Schillaci G, Cirocchi R, Gullà N et al (2012) Is laparoscopic right colectomy more effective than open resection? A meta-analysis of randomized and nonrandomized studies. Colorectal Dis 14:e447–e469CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Salman M, Bell T, Martin J, Bhuva K, Grim R, Ahuja V (2013) Use, cost, complications, and mortality of robotic versus nonrobotic general surgery procedures a nationwide database. Am Surg 79(6):553–560PubMed Salman M, Bell T, Martin J, Bhuva K, Grim R, Ahuja V (2013) Use, cost, complications, and mortality of robotic versus nonrobotic general surgery procedures a nationwide database. Am Surg 79(6):553–560PubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Tyler JA, Fox JP, Desai MM, Perry WB, Glasgow SC (2013) Outcomes and costs associated with robotic colectomy in the minimally invasive era. Dis Colon Rectum 56(4):458–466CrossRefPubMed Tyler JA, Fox JP, Desai MM, Perry WB, Glasgow SC (2013) Outcomes and costs associated with robotic colectomy in the minimally invasive era. Dis Colon Rectum 56(4):458–466CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Kim CW, Kim CH, Baik SH (2014) Outcomes of robotic-assisted colorectal surgery compared with laparoscopic and open surgery systematic review. J Gastrointest Surg 18(4):816–830CrossRefPubMed Kim CW, Kim CH, Baik SH (2014) Outcomes of robotic-assisted colorectal surgery compared with laparoscopic and open surgery systematic review. J Gastrointest Surg 18(4):816–830CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Deutsch GB, Sathyanarayana SA, Gunabushanam V, Mishra N, Rubach E, Zemon H, Klein JD, Denoto G 3rd (2012) Robotic vs. laparoscopic colorectal surgery: an institutional experience. Surg Endosc 26(4):956–963CrossRefPubMed Deutsch GB, Sathyanarayana SA, Gunabushanam V, Mishra N, Rubach E, Zemon H, Klein JD, Denoto G 3rd (2012) Robotic vs. laparoscopic colorectal surgery: an institutional experience. Surg Endosc 26(4):956–963CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Morpurgo E, Contardo T, Molaro R, Zerbinati A, Orsini C, D’Annibale A (2013) Robotic-assisted intracorporeal anastomosis versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for cancer: a case control study. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 23:414–417CrossRefPubMed Morpurgo E, Contardo T, Molaro R, Zerbinati A, Orsini C, D’Annibale A (2013) Robotic-assisted intracorporeal anastomosis versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for cancer: a case control study. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 23:414–417CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Weber PA, Merola S, Wasielewski A, Ballantyne GH (2002) Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic right and sigmoid colectomies for benign disease. Dis Colon Rectum 45:1689–1694CrossRefPubMed Weber PA, Merola S, Wasielewski A, Ballantyne GH (2002) Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic right and sigmoid colectomies for benign disease. Dis Colon Rectum 45:1689–1694CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Clinical outcomes and cost–benefit analysis comparing laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries
verfasst von
Vanitha Vasudevan
Ryan Reusche
Hannah Wallace
Srinivas Kaza
Publikationsdatum
28.04.2016
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Surgical Endoscopy / Ausgabe 12/2016
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-4910-1

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 12/2016

Surgical Endoscopy 12/2016 Zur Ausgabe

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

CME: 2 Punkte

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht, PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske Das Webinar S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“ beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.