Comparative effectiveness of laparoscopic versus robot-assisted colorectal resection
- 1.2k Downloads
During the past 20 years, laparoscopy has revolutionized colorectal surgery. With proven benefits in patient outcomes and healthcare utilization, laparoscopic colorectal surgery has steadily increased in use. Robotic surgery, a new addition to colorectal surgery, has been suggested to facilitate and overcome limitations of laparoscopic surgery. Our objective was to compare the outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic resection (RALR) to laparoscopic resections (LAP) in colorectal surgery.
A national inpatient database was evaluated for colorectal resections performed over a 30-month period. Cases were divided into traditional LAP and RALR resection groups. Cost of robot acquisition and servicing were not measured. Main outcome measures were hospital length of stay (LOS), operative time, complications, and costs between groups.
A total of 17,265 LAP and 744 RARL procedures were identified. The RALR cases had significantly higher total cost ($5,272 increase, p < 0.001) and direct cost ($4,432 increase, p < 0.001), significantly longer operating time (39 min, p < 0.001), and were more likely to develop postoperative bleeding (odds ratio 1.6; p = 0.014) than traditional laparoscopic patients. LOS, complications, and discharge disposition were comparable. Similar findings were noted for both laparoscopic colonic and rectal surgery.
RALR had significantly higher costs and operative time than traditional LAP without a measurable benefit.
KeywordsRobotic surgery Laparoscopic surgery Healthcare utilization Surgical outcomes Colorectal surgery
This study was completed with support from Lobat Hashemi from Covidien’s Healthcare Economics and Outcomes Research Department.
Drs. Keller, Senagore, Lawrence, Champagne, and Delaney have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
- 7.Peplinski R (2006) Past, present and future of the da Vinci robot. 2nd UK robotic urology course. Guy’s Hospital, LondonGoogle Scholar
- 8.Boggess JF, Gehrig PA, Cantrell L, Shafer A, Ridgway M, Skinner EN, Fowler WC (2008) A case-control study of robot-assisted type III radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection compared with open radical hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 199(4):357.e1–357.e7Google Scholar
- 16.Trastulli S, Farinella E, Cirocchi R, Cavaliere D, Avenia N, Sciannameo F, Gulla N, Noya G, Boselli C (2012) Robotic resection compared with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcome. Colorectal Dis 14(4):e134–e156PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Carreyrou J (2010) Surgical robot examined in injuries. Wall Street J Google Scholar
- 29.Citron Research Reports on Intuitive Surgical: has the halo been broken on intuitive surgical? Available at: http://www.citronresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/isrg-final1.pdf
- 34.Averill RF, Goldfield N, Hughes JS, Bonazell J, McCullough EC et al (2003) All-Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Groups (APR-DRGs), Version. 20Google Scholar
- 35.Howington JA, Gunnarsson CL, Maddaus MA, McKenna RJ, Meyers BF, Miller D, Moore M, Rizzo JA, Swanson S (2012) In-hospital clinical and economic consequences of pulmonary wedge resections for cancer using video-assisted thoracoscopic techniques vs traditional open resections: a retrospective database analysis. Chest 141(2):429–435PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 36.SAGES-MIRA Robotic Surgery Consensus Group (2007) A consensus document on robotic surgery. Available at: http://www.sages.org/publication/id/ROBOT/. Accessed April 2013
- 46.Delaney CP, Senagore AJ, Ponsky L (2010) Robot-assisted surgery and health care costs. N Engl J Med 363(22):2175; author reply 2176Google Scholar
- 47.OSHPD (2010) Patient discharge data file documentation. PDD (Public File). Available at: http://www.oshpd.ca.gov/HID/Products/PatDischargeData/PublicDataSet/Doc/PD10docwapp.pdf. Accessed April 2013
- 48.Ahmed K, Ibrahim A, Wang TT, Khan N, Challacombe B, Khan MS, Dasgupta P (2012) Assessing the cost effectiveness of robotics in urological surgery: a systematic review. BJU IntGoogle Scholar
- 55.Bianchi PP, Ceriani C, Locatelli A, Spinoglio G, Zampino MG, Sonzogni A, Crosta C, Andreoni B (2010) Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a comparative analysis of oncological safety and short-term outcomes. Surg Endosc 24(11):2888–2894PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 62.Vlug MS, Wind J, Hollmann MW, Ubbink DT, Cense HA, Engel AF, Gerhards MF, van Wagensveld BA, van der Zaag ES, van Geloven AA et al (2011) Laparoscopy in combination with fast track multimodal management is the best perioperative strategy in patients undergoing colonic surgery: a randomized clinical trial (LAFA-study). Ann Surg 254(6):868–875PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar