Skip to main content
Erschienen in:

31.10.2022 | Original Article

Increased cost burden associated with robot-assisted rectopexy: do patient outcomes justify increased expenditure?

verfasst von: Jordan Wlodarczyk, Danielle Brabender, Abhinav Gupta, Kshjitij Gaur, Andrea Madiedo, Sang W. Lee, Christine Hsieh

Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy | Ausgabe 3/2023

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

Robot-assisted surgical techniques have flourished over the years, with refinement in instrumentation and optics allowing for adaptation and increasing utilization across surgical fields. Transabdominal rectopexy with mesh for rectal prolapse may stand to benefit significantly from the use of a robotic platform. However, increased operative times and immediate associated costs of robotic surgery may provide a counterargument to widespread adoption.

Methods

To determine which approach to the treatment of rectal prolapse, laparoscopic or robotic, is more cost effective and provides better outcomes with fewer complications, a retrospective review was performed at a single tertiary care academic institution from May 2013 to December 2020. Twenty-two patients underwent transabdominal mesh rectopexy through a robot-assisted DaVinci platform (Intuitive Sunnyvale, CA), and thirty through a laparoscopic platform. Main outcome measures included operative, hospital, and total cost as defined by total charges billed. Secondary outcomes included rate of recurrence, intra-operative complications, median operative time, post-operative complications, average hospital length of stay, inpatient pain medication usage, and post-operative functional outcomes.

Results

Cost analysis for robot-assisted versus laparoscopic rectopexy demonstrated operating room costs of $46,118 ± $9329 for the robotic group, versus $33,090 ± $15,395 (p = 0.002) for the laparoscopic group. Inpatient hospital costs were $60,723 ± $20,170 vs. $40,798 ± $14,325 (p = 0.001), and total costs were $106,841 ± $25,513 vs. $73,888 ± $28,129 (p ≤ 0.001). When secondary outcomes were compared for the robotic versus laparoscopic groups, there were no differences in any of the aforementioned outcome variables except for operative time, which was 79 min longer in the robotic group (p ≤ 0.001).

Conclusions

Robot-assisted mesh rectopexy demonstrated no clinical benefit over traditional laparoscopic mesh rectopexy, with significantly higher operative and hospital costs. A reduction in the acquisition and maintenance costs for robotic surgery is needed before large-scale adoption and implementation of the robotic platform for this procedure.
Literatur
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H et al (2017) Effect of robot-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery on risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer the rolarr randomized clinical trial. JAMA J Am Med Assoc 318(16):1569–1580. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.7219CrossRef Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H et al (2017) Effect of robot-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery on risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer the rolarr randomized clinical trial. JAMA J Am Med Assoc 318(16):1569–1580. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1001/​jama.​2017.​7219CrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Gavriilidis P, Wheeler J, Spinelli A, de Angelis N, Simopoulos C, Di Saverio S (2020) Robotic vs laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancers: has a paradigm change occurred? A systematic review by updated meta-analysis. Color Dis 22(11):1506–1517. https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.15084CrossRef Gavriilidis P, Wheeler J, Spinelli A, de Angelis N, Simopoulos C, Di Saverio S (2020) Robotic vs laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancers: has a paradigm change occurred? A systematic review by updated meta-analysis. Color Dis 22(11):1506–1517. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​codi.​15084CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Increased cost burden associated with robot-assisted rectopexy: do patient outcomes justify increased expenditure?
verfasst von
Jordan Wlodarczyk
Danielle Brabender
Abhinav Gupta
Kshjitij Gaur
Andrea Madiedo
Sang W. Lee
Christine Hsieh
Publikationsdatum
31.10.2022
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Surgical Endoscopy / Ausgabe 3/2023
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09728-3

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

Nur selten ernste Komplikationen bei endoskopischer Sinuschirurgie

Etwa 3% der Menschen mit einer endoskopischen Nasennebenhöhlenoperation entwickeln ausgeprägtes Nasenbluten. Andere Komplikationen, wie Verletzungen des Nervus opticus oder eine Meningitis, treten nur äußerst selten auf, legt eine Registeranalyse nahe.

Hochrisiko-Spinaliom am besten mit der Mohs-Chirurgie entfernen

Die Mohs-Chirurgie ist zwar mit mehr Aufwand verbunden als die herkömmliche Exzision; für die Versorgung kutaner Hochrisiko-Plattenepithelkarzinome lohnt sich die zeitintensive Technik aber in jedem Fall. Laut einer aktuellen Studie sinkt im Vergleich das Sterberisiko.

Mechanische Herzklappe beschert jüngeren Betroffenen längeres Leben

Patienten und Patientinnen bevorzugen bioprothetische Herzklappen gegenüber mechanischen Klappenprothesen. Diese Wahl könnte sich zumindest für jüngere Patienten nachteilig auswirken: Ihnen bietet eine mechanische Klappe anscheinend einen Überlebensvorteil.

Darmpolyp weg – Peptid-Gel gegen Nachblutungen drauf?

Das Nachblutungsrisiko nach einer endoskopischen Mukosaresektion von flachen kolorektalen und duodenalen Adenomen war in der deutschen PURPLE-Studie mit einem hämostatischen Gel nicht kleiner als ohne Prophylaxe.

Update Chirurgie

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