Does type of robotic platform make a difference in the final cost of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy?

This study evaluates the difference of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) costs in patients with similar preoperative characteristics operated on using the da Vinci® SP and Xi robotic platforms. We performed a retrospective analysis on 71 consecutive patients with prostate cancer who underwent RARP with the SP robot between June 2019 and April 2020. Propensity score (PS) matching was performed and 71 patients were selected from a cohort of 875 who underwent RARP with the Xi robot in the same period. We divided the total expense per surgery into the cost of disposable materials, robotic instruments (initial purchasing cost divided by the number of "lives"), and operative room costs. Only variable costs are included in this study, as fixed costs do not vary between procedures and are the same for both cohorts. Fixed costs include anesthesia, pathology, surgeon, and hospitalization fees. The median total cost for SP-RARP was $5586 ($5360-$5982) USD and $4875 ($4661-$5093) USD with the XI for a median cost difference of $707 ($584-$832) (P < 0.001). The median cost of disposables for the SP was $1877 ($1588-$2193) USD and for the Xi $1527 ($1407-$1781) USD, P < 0.001. Non-disposable instruments cost per case (fixed cost) was $1610 and $1270 USD for the SP and Xi, respectively. The cost of radical prostatectomy in the SP cohort is higher than the Xi cohort. The greater price was primarily due to the increased cost of instruments and disposable materials. In our experience, the lack of GelPOINT and space maker is also crucial factors to decrease the SP total cost.

Patient surgical satisfaction after da Vinci® single-port and multi-port robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: propensity score-matched analysis.

The da Vinci® single-port (SP) and multiport (Xi) approaches to robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) are described by different authors in the literature, primarily comparing short-term outcomes of both modalities. To our knowledge, this is the first article comparing the surgical perspective and satisfaction of patients who underwent RARP with the SP and Xi platforms. To determine the patient surgical perspective and satisfaction in terms of pain control, return to normal activity, and overall results of surgery for two groups who underwent SP and Xi radical prostatectomy. The data from 71 consecutive patients who underwent SP RARP in a single center from June 2019 to April 2020 was compared to 875 patients who underwent Xi RARP in the same period. A single surgeon performed all procedures with a transperitoneal technique. After a propensity score match, two groups of 71 patients (SP and Xi) were selected and compared in the study. Patients were contacted by phone by two interviewers and a questionnaire was administered in English or Spanish. Patients were instructed not to disclose the type of robotic surgery they underwent, as interviewers were blinded to that information. A validated Surgical Satisfaction Questionnaire (SSQ-8) was used, along with an additional question from our institution asking about the satisfaction with the number of incision sites (GRI-1). Data were analyzed as continuous and discrete variables to compare the differences between the Xi and SP cohorts. A response rate of 85.9% (n = 61) in the Xi group and 73.2% (n = 52) in the SP group was captured. Overall satisfaction with surgical results was 80% and 88% in the Xi and SP cohorts, respectively. No statistical difference in responses was found between the Xi and SP cohorts for SSQ-8. However, GRI-1 demonstrated a statistically significant difference (P < 0.001) in terms of number of scars that favors the SP approach. Limitations of this study are the small sample size and recall bias. We found no statistical difference between the groups regarding the answers for SSQ-8 questionnaire; both groups were very satisfied. When assessing the number of incision sites with the GRI-1 question, patients who underwent MP had lower satisfaction rates compared to SP. These patients perceived the number of scars and their appearance as reason for lower satisfaction. We believe that future studies should consider patient's postoperative perspective when adopting new platforms in order to combine adequate treatment with patient expectations. We performed a study assessing the postoperative satisfaction and perspectives of two groups of patients who underwent radical prostatectomy with two different robots (SP and Xi). There was no difference in patient satisfaction with the results of either the da Vinci® SP or Xi RARP except for the patients' perception on their number of scars, which favored the SP group.

COVID-19 model-based practice changes in managing a large prostate cancer practice: following the trends during a month-long ordeal.

Coronavirus (COVID-19) has been a life-changing experience for both individuals and institutions. We describe changes in our practice based on real-time assessment of various national and international trends of COVID-19 and its effectiveness in the management of our resources. Initial risk assessment and peak resource requirement using the COVID-19 Hospital Impact Model for Epidemics (CHIME) and McKinsey models. Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis of our practice's approach during the pandemic. Based on CHIME the community followed 60% social distancing, the number of expected new patients hospitalized at maximum surge would be 401, with 100 patients requiring ventilator support. In contrast, when the community followed 15% social distancing, the maximum surge of hospitalized new patients would be 1823 and 455 patients would require a ventilator. on April 15, the expected May requirement of ICU beds at peak would be 68, with 61 patients needing ventilators. The estimated surge numbers improved throughout April, and on April 22 the expected ICU bed peak in May would be 11.7, and those requiring ventilator would be 10.5. Simultaneously, within a month, our surgical waitlist grew from 585 to over 723 patients. Our SWOT analysis revealed our internal strengths and inherent weakness, relevant to the pandemic. A graded and a guarded response to this type of situation is crucial in managing patients in a large practice.

Evidence-based evolution of our robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) technique through 13,000 cases.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) has become the standard of surgical care in the USA and around the world. Over the past 18 years, we have performed 13,000 radical prostatectomies, and our surgical technique has evolved over time. We discuss this evolution and how it has helped us achieve optimal patient outcomes.

Establishing a successful robotic surgery program and improving operating room efficiency: literature review and our experience report.

The benefits and outcomes of robotic surgery are well established in the literature across multiple specialties. The increasing need for and dissemination of this technology associated with high costs, demand adequate planning during its implementation. Therefore, after years of training several robotic surgeons and establishing multiple robotic programs worldwide, the purpose of this article is to focus on the necessary elements in the initial phase of establishing a robotics program. We summarized in our article crucial factors when implementing a robotic program. Therefore, we explained in detail the critical aspects of the program design, implementation, marketing, research and outcomes, and ultimately improving efficiency. The creation of a robotics planning committee composed of several hospital individuals contributes in different lines of work such as cost evaluation, staff training, and OR modifications. A multidisciplinary approach and a robotic lead surgeon are also recommended to guarantee surgical volume and satisfactory outcomes. Furthermore, market analysis should evaluate the competition with other centres and potential surgical candidates in that area. Data collection should also be considered a vital element of the program organization, which assures quality control and helps to diagnose any program deficiency. We believe that the robotic program should be individualized according to the economy and reality of each centre. The success and duration of a robotic surgery program depend on long-term results. Therefore, careful planning with a robotic committee defining the types of procedures to be performed and appropriate multidisciplinary training to avoid surgery cancelations are crucial factors in establishing a successful program.