19
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Robotics in general surgery: A systematic cost assessment

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The utilisation of robotic-assisted techniques is a novelty in the field of general surgery. Our intention was to examine the up to date available literature on the cost assessment of robotic surgery of diverse operations in general surgery. PubMed and Scopus databases were searched in a systematic way to retrieve the included studies in our review. Thirty-one studies were retrieved, referring on a vast range of surgical operations. The mean cost for robotic, open and laparoscopic ranged from 2539 to 57,002, 7888 to 16,851 and 1799 to 50,408 Euros, respectively. The mean operative charges ranged from 273.74 to 13,670 Euros. More specifically, for the robotic and laparoscopic gastric fundoplication, the cost ranged from 1534 to 2257 and 657 to 763 Euros, respectively. For the robotic and laparoscopic colectomy, it ranged from 3739 to 17,080 and 3109 to 33,865 Euros, respectively. For the robotic and laparoscopic cholecystectomy, ranged from 1163.75 to 1291 and from 273.74 to 1223 Euros, respectively. The mean non-operative costs ranged from 900 to 48,796 from 8347 to 8800 and from 870 to 42,055 Euros, for robotic, open and laparoscopic technique, respectively. Conversions to laparotomy were present in 34/18,620 (0.18%) cases of laparoscopic and in 22/1488 (1.5%) cases of robotic technique. Duration of surgery robotic, open and laparoscopic ranged from 54.6 to 328.7, 129 to 234, and from 50.2 to 260 min, respectively. The present evidence reveals that robotic surgery, under specific conditions, has the potential to become cost-effective. Large number of cases, presence of industry competition and multidisciplinary team utilisation are some of the factors that could make more reasonable and cost-effective the robotic-assisted technique.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Randomized clinical trial of robot-assisted versus standard laparoscopic right colectomy.

          Robotic surgery was invented to overcome the demerits of laparoscopic technique. However, it is unclear whether robot-assisted colectomy (RAC) has significant clinical advantages over laparoscopically assisted colectomy (LAC) in treating colonic cancer. The aim of this study was to compare the surgical outcomes of RAC versus LAC for right-sided colonic cancer. Patients with right-sided colonic cancer were randomized to receive RAC or LAC. The primary outcome measure was length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes were duration of operation, morbidity, postoperative pain, hospital costs and pathological quality of the specimen. Of 71 patients randomized, 70 (35 in each group) were included in the analysis. Hospital stay, surgical complications, postoperative pain score, resection margin clearance and number of lymph nodes harvested were similar in both groups. The duration of surgery was longer in the RAC group (195 versus 130 min; P < 0·001). No conversion to open surgery was needed in either group. Overall hospital costs were significantly higher for RAC (US $ 12,235 versus $ 10,320; P = 0·013); the higher costs were attributed primarily to the costs of surgery, including consumables. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic right colectomy was feasible but provided no benefit to justify the greater cost. NCT01042743 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov). Copyright © 2012 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a cost analysis from a single institute in Korea.

            Since its introduction, robotic surgery has been applied actively in several fields of minimally invasive surgery, and its use in the field of colorectal surgery is also increasing. In the studies to date, feasibility and safety have been the main focus, but the economics involved are important to examine. We compared the economics of robotic surgery with those of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. We analyzed the clinical characteristics, total hospital charges, payments, operating room costs, and hospital profits for patients who underwent robotic and laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer at Korea University Anam Hospital between July 2007 and August 2010. From July 2007 and August 2010, 154 robot-assisted and 150 laparoscopic rectal surgeries were performed. The patient demographics were similar in the two groups with the exception of tumor location (6.7 vs 8.7 cm distal to the anal verge; p = 0.043), preoperative chemoradiotherapy (22.7 vs 8 %; p = 0.001), and operative time (285.2 vs 219.7 min; p = 0.018). Postoperative course and complications were also similar in the two groups. The total hospital charges in U.S. dollars ($14,647 vs $9,978; p = 0.001) and payments made by patients ($11,540 vs $3,956; p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the robotic group. Hospital profit was significantly lower in the robotic group than in the laparoscopic group ($689 vs $1,671; p < 0.001). Robot-assisted surgery is more expensive than laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. Considering that robotic surgery can be applied more easily for low-lying cancers, the cost-effectiveness of robotic rectal cancer surgery should be assessed based on oncologic outcomes and functional results from future studies.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Economic evaluation of da Vinci-assisted robotic surgery: a systematic review.

              Health technology assessment (HTA) is frequently used when a new and expensive technology is being introduced into clinical practice. This certainly is the case with the da Vinci surgical robot, with costs ranging from $1 to $2.5 million for each unit. This systematic review documents major variability in the reported cost evaluation studies of da Vinci robot-assisted operations compared with those performed by the direct manual laparoscopic approach. Published studies in the English language related to the period 2000-2010 were searched using economic and clinical electronic databases. All 11 reports included some form of cost analysis, which made it possible for the authors to extract information on certain specific economic outcomes: operating room time, hospital stay, and total costs. With the exception of two studies, the reported operating room time was higher with the robotic approach than with manual laparoscopic surgery, and the hospital stay was the same for the two techniques. Robotic surgery is significantly more expensive if the purchase and maintenance costs of the robot system are included in the total costs. Only 3 of the 11 publications included these costs. The disadvantage of robotic surgery is its higher costs related to purchase and maintenance of technology and its longer operating room time. However, emerging evidence shows that operating room time decreases with experience using the robot. From the HTA viewpoint, the result of this review is that the jury still is out on the HTA of da Vinci-assisted robotic surgery.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Minim Access Surg
                J Minim Access Surg
                JMAS
                Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
                Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd (India )
                0972-9941
                1998-3921
                Oct-Dec 2017
                : 13
                : 4
                : 243-255
                Affiliations
                [1]Department of Surgery, General Hospital of Attica “KAT”, Athens, Greece
                [1 ]Department of Medicine, Medical School of Athens, University of Athens, Athens, Greece
                [2 ]Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Christie Hospital, Manchester, United Kingdom
                Author notes
                Address for correspondence: Dr. Ioannis D. Gkegkes, 141, Oropou Street, Nea Ionia, Athens 14232, Greece. E-mail: ioannisgkegkes@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                JMAS-13-243
                10.4103/0972-9941.195565
                5607789
                28000648
                90453aff-ccde-4308-a502-450bdb50a440
                Copyright: © 2017 Journal of Minimal Access Surgery

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

                History
                : 09 February 2016
                : 29 March 2016
                Categories
                Review Article

                Surgery
                costs,general surgery,healthcare economics,outcomes,robotics,training
                Surgery
                costs, general surgery, healthcare economics, outcomes, robotics, training

                Comments

                Comment on this article