Robotic-assisted benign hysterectomy compared with laparoscopic, vaginal, and open surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The potential benefits and limitations of benign hysterectomy surgical approaches are still debated. We aimed at evaluating any differences with a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases were last searched on 6/2/2021 to identify English randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective cohort and retrospective independent database studies published between Jan 1, 2010 and Dec 31, 2020 reporting perioperative outcomes following robotic hysterectomy versus laparoscopic, open, or vaginal approach (PROSPERO #CRD42022352718). Twenty-four articles were included that reported on 110,306 robotic, 262,715 laparoscopic, 189,237 vaginal, and 554,407 open patients. The robotic approach was associated with a shorter hospital stay (p < 0.00001), less blood loss (p = 0.009), and fewer complications (OR: 0.42 [0.27, 0.66], p = 0.0001) when compared to the open approach. The main benefit compared to the laparoscopic and vaginal approaches was a shorter hospital (R/L WMD: - 0.144 [- 0.21, - 0.08], p < 0.0001; R/V WMD: - 0.39 [- 0.70, - 0.08], p = 0.01). Other benefits seen were sensitive to the inclusion of database studies. Study type differences in outcomes, a lack of RCTs for robotic vs. open comparisons, learning curve issues, and limited robotic vs. vaginal publications are limitations. While the robotic approach was mainly comparable to the laparoscopic approach, this meta-analysis confirms the classic benefits of minimally invasive surgery when comparing robotic hysterectomy to open surgery. We also reported the advantages of robotic surgery over vaginal surgery in a patient population with a higher incidence of large uterus and prior surgery.

To develop, implement and evaluate an integrated care pathway for patients presenting with pneumothorax.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Pneumothorax is a common presentation to acute healthcare services in Ireland, however there is wide variation in management approaches between centres. There is robust evidence to demonstrate that ambulatory management of pneumothorax is feasible and safe. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the implementation of an integrated care pathway (ICP) for pneumothorax patients with a focus on ambulatory care would be economically beneficial for the healthcare system. METHODS: This study developed, implemented and evaluated an ICP for all patients presenting with pneumothorax, with a specific focus on ambulatory management for suitable patients. The ICP was designed to be utilised in the Irish healthcare setting, and was evaluated using a prospective multi-centre observational study, with a rigorous economic analysis at the centre of study design. MAIN FINDINGS: Implementation of the ICP resulted in a statistically significant reduction in inpatient length of stay of 2.84 days from 7.4 to 4.56 days (p = 0.001). The incremental per patient cost reduction of treating a patient according to the pneumothorax ICP was 2314 euro. There were no adverse events related to drain insertion at the study sites. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates therefore that standardisation of care for pneumothorax patients with a focus on ambulatory management are economically beneficial for the publicly-funded healthcare service. It is envisaged that this work will be used to inform healthcare policy at a national level across Ireland.

The RECOURSE Study: Long-term Oncologic Outcomes Associated With Robotically Assisted Minimally Invasive Procedures for Endometrial, Cervical, Colorectal, Lung, or Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess long-term outcomes with robotic versus laparoscopic/thoracoscopic and open surgery for colorectal, urologic, endometrial, cervical, and thoracic cancers. BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery provides perioperative benefits and similar oncological outcomes compared with open surgery. Recent robotic surgery data have questioned long-term benefits. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cancer outcomes based on surgical approach was conducted based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines using Pubmed, Scopus, and Embase. Hazard ratios for recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) were extracted/estimated using a hierarchical decision tree and pooled in RevMan 5.4 using inverse-variance fixed-effect (heterogeneity nonsignificant) or random effect models. RESULTS: Of 31,204 references, 199 were included (7 randomized, 23 database, 15 prospective, 154 retrospective studies)-157,876 robotic, 68,007 laparoscopic/thoracoscopic, and 234,649 open cases. Cervical cancer: OS and DFS were similar between robotic and laparoscopic [1.01 (0.56, 1.80), P =0.98] or open [1.18 (0.99, 1.41), P =0.06] surgery; 2 papers reported less recurrence with open surgery [2.30 (1.32, 4.01), P =0.003]. Endometrial cancer: the only significant result favored robotic over open surgery [OS; 0.77 (0.71, 0.83), P <0.001]. Lobectomy: DFS favored robotic over thoracoscopic surgery [0.74 (0.59, 0.93), P =0.009]; OS favored robotic over open surgery [0.93 (0.87, 1.00), P =0.04]. Prostatectomy: recurrence was less with robotic versus laparoscopic surgery [0.77 (0.68, 0.87), P <0.0001]; OS favored robotic over open surgery [0.78 (0.72, 0.85), P <0.0001]. Low-anterior resection: OS significantly favored robotic over laparoscopic [0.76 (0.63, 0.91), P =0.004] and open surgery [0.83 (0.74, 0.93), P =0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term outcomes were similar for robotic versus laparoscopic/thoracoscopic and open surgery, with no safety signal or indication requiring further research (PROSPERO Reg#CRD42021240519).

Systematic literature review of cost-effectiveness analyses of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for localised prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Review and assess cost-effectiveness studies of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) for localised prostate cancer compared with open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). DESIGN: Systematic review. SETTING: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, International HTA database, the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination database and various HTA websites were searched (January 2005 to March 2021) to identify the eligible cost-effectiveness studies. PARTICIPANTS: Cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, or cost-minimization analyses examining RARP versus ORP or LRP were included in this systematic review. INTERVENTIONS: Different surgical approaches to treat localized prostate cancer: RARP compared with ORP and LRP. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: A structured narrative synthesis was developed to summarize results of cost, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness results (eg, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]). Study quality was assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria Extended checklist. Application of medical device features were evaluated. RESULTS: Twelve studies met inclusion criteria, 11 of which were cost-utility analyses. Higher quality-adjusted life-years and higher costs were observed with RARP compared with ORP or LRP in 11 studies (91%). Among four studies comparing RARP with LRP, three reported RARP was dominant or cost-effective. Among ten studies comparing RARP with ORP, RARP was more cost-effective in five, not cost-effective in two, and inconclusive in three studies. Studies with longer time horizons tended to report favorable cost-effectiveness results for RARP. Nine studies (75%) were rated of moderate or good quality. Recommended medical device features were addressed to varying degrees within the literature as follows: capital investment included in most studies, dynamic pricing considered in about half, and learning curve and incremental innovation were poorly addressed. CONCLUSIONS: Despite study heterogeneity, RARP was more costly and effective compared with ORP and LRP in most studies and likely to be more cost-effective, particularly over a multiple year or lifetime time horizon. Further cost-effectiveness analyses for RARP that more thoroughly consider medical device features and use an appropriate time horizon are needed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021246811.

Cost-effectiveness of Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer in the UK.

Importance: The cost-effectiveness of different surgical techniques for radical prostatectomy remains a subject of debate. Emergence of recent critical clinical data and changes in surgical equipment costs due to their shared use by different clinical specialties necessitate an updated cost-effectiveness analysis in a centralized, largely government-funded health care system such as the UK National Health Service (NHS). Objective: To compare robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) with open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and laparoscopic-assisted radical prostatectomy (LRP) using contemporary data on clinical outcomes, costs, and surgical volumes in the UK. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic analysis used a Markov model developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of RARP, LRP, and ORP to treat localized prostate cancer. The model was constructed from the perspective of the UK NHS. The model simulated 65-year-old men who underwent radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer and were followed up for a 10-year period. Data were analyzed from May 1, 2020, to July 31, 2021. Exposures: Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy, LRP, and ORP. Main Outcomes and Measures: Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs (direct medical costs and costs outside the NHS), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results: Compared with LRP, RARP cost £1785 (US $2350) less and had 0.24 more QALYs gained; thus, RARP was a dominant option compared with LRP. Compared with ORP, RARP had 0.12 more QALYs gained but cost £526 (US $693) more during the 10-year time frame, resulting in an ICER of £4293 (US $5653)/QALY. Because the ICER was below the £30 000 (US $39 503) willingness-to-pay threshold, RARP was more cost-effective than ORP in the UK. The most sensitive variable influencing the cost-effectiveness of RARP was the lower risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR). Scenario analysis indicated RARP would remain more cost-effective than ORP as long as the BCR hazard ratios comparing RARP vs ORP were less than 0.99. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that in the UK, RARP has an ICER lower than the willingness-to-pay threshold and thus is likely a cost-effective surgical treatment option for patients with localized prostate cancer compared with ORP and LRP. The results were mainly driven by the lower risk of BCR for RARP. These findings may differ in other health care settings where different thresholds and costs may apply.

Methodology to standardize heterogeneous statistical data presentations for combining time-to-event oncologic outcomes.

Survival analysis following oncological treatments require specific analysis techniques to account for data considerations, such as failure to observe the time of event, patient withdrawal, loss to follow-up, and differential follow up. These techniques can include Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard analyses. However, studies do not always report overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), or cancer recurrence using hazard ratios, making the synthesis of such oncologic outcomes difficult. We propose a hierarchical utilization of methods to extract or estimate the hazard ratio to standardize time-to-event outcomes so that study inclusion into meta-analyses can be maximized. We also provide proof-of concept results from a statistical analysis that compares OS, DFS, and cancer recurrence for robotic surgery to open and non-robotic minimally invasive surgery. In our example, use of the proposed methodology would allow for the increase in data inclusion from 108 hazard ratios reported to 240 hazard ratios reported or estimated, resulting in an increase of 122%. While there are publications summarizing the motivation for these analyses, and comprehensive papers describing strategies to obtain estimates from published time-dependent analyses, we are not aware of a manuscript that describes a prospective framework for an analysis of this scale focusing on the inclusion of a maximum number of publications reporting on long-term oncologic outcomes incorporating various presentations of statistical data.

Impact of type of minimally invasive approach on open conversions across ten common procedures in different specialties.

BACKGROUND: Conversion rates during minimally invasive surgery are generally examined in the limited scope of a particular procedure. However, for a hospital or payor, the cumulative impact of conversions during commonly performed procedures could have a much larger negative effect than what is appreciated by individual surgeons. The aim of this study is to assess open conversion rates during minimally invasive surgery (MIS) across common procedures using laparoscopic/thoracoscopic (LAP/VATS) and robotic-assisted (RAS) approaches. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using the Premier Database on patients who underwent common operations (hysterectomy, lobectomy, right colectomy, benign sigmoidectomy, low anterior resection, inguinal and ventral hernia repair, and partial nephrectomy) between January 2013 and September 2015. ICD-9 and CPT codes were used to define procedures, modality, and conversion. Propensity scores were calculated using patient, hospital, and surgeon characteristics. Propensity-score matched analysis was used to compare conversions between LAP/VATS and RAS for each procedure. RESULTS: A total of 278,520 patients had MIS approaches of the ten operations. Conversion occurred in 5% of patients and was associated with a 1.77 day incremental increase in length of stay and $3441 incremental increase in cost. RAS was associated with a 58.5% lower rate of conversion to open surgery compared to LAP/VATS. CONCLUSION: At a health system or payer level, conversion to open is detrimental not just for the patient and surgeon but also puts a significant strain on hospital resources. Use of RAS was associated with less than half of the conversion rate observed for LAP/VATS.

Is robotic lobectomy cheaper? A micro-cost analysis.

Higher capital costs and operating room costs associated with Lobectomy via Robot Assisted Thoracic Surgery (RATS) have previously been suggested as the principal contributors to the elevated overall cost. This study uses a micro-costing approach to a previous analysis of clinical outcomes of RATS, Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery (VATS) and Open Lobectomy to evaluate the most significant cost drivers for the higher cost of robot-assisted lobectomy. A micro-costing model was developed to reflect the pathway of patients from day of surgery through the first 30 days following lobectomy. Costs were provided for RATS, VATS and Open approaches. Sensitivity analysis was performed specifically in the area of staff costs. A threshold sensitivity analysis of the overall cost components was also performed. Total cost per case for the RATS approach was €13,321 for the VATS approach €11,567, and for the Open approach €12,582. The overall cost differences were driven primarily by the elevated consumable costs associated with RATS Lobectomy. Capital costs account for a relatively small proportion of the per-case cost difference. This study presents a detailed analysis of the cost drivers for lobectomy, modelled for the three primary surgical approaches. We believe this is a useful tool for surgeons, hospital management, and service commissioning agencies to accurately and comprehensively determine where cost savings can be applied in their programme to improve the cost-effectiveness of RATS lobectomy.

A systematic review of robotic versus open and video assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) approaches for thymectomy.

BACKGROUND: Median sternotomy has been the most commonly used approach for thymectomy to date. Recent advances in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and robotic access with CO2 insufflation techniques have allowed more minimally invasive approaches. However, prior reviews have not compared robotic to both open and VATS thymectomy. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines using PubMed, Embase and Scopus databases. Original research articles comparing robotic to VATS or to open thymectomy for myasthenia gravis, anterior mediastinal masses, or thymomas were included. Meta-analyses were performed for mortality, operative time, blood loss, transfusions, length of stay, conversion to open, intraoperative and postoperative complication rates, and positive/negative margin rates. RESULTS: Robotic thymectomy is a valid alternative to the open approach; advantages include: reduced blood loss [weighted mean difference (WMD): -173.03, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): -305.90, -40.17, P=0.01], fewer postoperative complications (odds ratio: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.22, 0.60, P<0.00001), a shorter hospital stay (WMD: -2.78, 95% CI: -3.22, -2.33, P<0.00001), and a lower positive margin rate (relative difference: -0.04, 95% CI: -0.07, -0.01, P=0.01), with comparable operative times (WMD: 6.73, 95% CI: -21.20, 34.66, P=0.64). Robotic thymectomy was comparable with the VATS approach; both have the advantage of avoiding median sternotomy. CONCLUSIONS: While randomized controlled studies are required to make definitive conclusions, current data suggests that robotic thymectomy is superior to open surgery and comparable to a VATS approach. Long-term follow-up is required to further delineate oncological outcomes.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic versus open and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery approaches for lobectomy.

OBJECTIVES: A number of meta-analytical and database studies have sought to compare open, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and robotic operative approaches to lobectomy, often with conflicting results. Our objective was to perform a comprehensive review of these meta-analytical and database studies published to date. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using the PubMed and Scopus databases. Primary outcome was short-term mortality, and secondary outcomes were operative time, blood loss or transfusion rate, hospital stay, conversions, lymph node yield and complications. Meta-analyses of the primary and secondary outcomes were performed. RESULTS: Robotic lobectomy is a valid alternative to the VATS approach and is superior to the open approach with respect to complications [OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.58-0.76, P < 0.00001] and duration of hospital stay (WMD -1.4, 95% CI -1.96-0.85, P < 0.00001). It is inferior to both VATS and open with respect to operative duration (robotic vs. VATS; WMD 4.98, 95% CI 2.61-7.36, P < 0.001, robotic vs. open WMD 65.56, 95% CI 53.66-77.46, P < 0.00001). Robotic approach is superior with respect to 30-day mortality compared to VATS (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45-0.83, P = 0.001 and open approaches (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.33-0.85, P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest published systematic review and meta-analysis to date qualifying the robotic lobectomy as a reasonable alternative to VATS and open surgery. Short-term survival is superior in the robotic cohorts. No definitive conclusions on long-term outcomes can be drawn until a randomized controlled trial comparing approaches is conducted.

Assessment of Robotic Console Skills (ARCS): construct validity of a novel global rating scale for technical skills in robotically assisted surgery.

BACKGROUND: Skill assessment during robotically assisted surgery remains challenging. While the popularity of the Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotics Skills (GEARS) has grown, its lack of discrimination between independent console skills limits its usefulness. The purpose of this study was to evaluate construct validity and interrater reliability of a novel assessment designed to overcome this limitation. METHODS: We created the Assessment of Robotic Console Skills (ARCS), a global rating scale with six console skill domains. Fifteen volunteers who were console surgeons for 0 ("novice"), 1-100 ("intermediate"), or >100 ("experienced") robotically assisted procedures performed three standardized tasks. Three blinded raters scored the task videos using ARCS, with a 5-point Likert scale for each skill domain. Scores were analyzed for evidence of construct validity and interrater reliability. RESULTS: Group demographics were indistinguishable except for the number of robotically assisted procedures performed (p = 0.001). The mean scores of experienced subjects exceeded those of novices in dexterity (3.8 > 1.4, p < 0.001), field of view (4.1 > 1.8, p < 0.001), instrument visualization (3.9 > 2.2, p < 0.001), manipulator workspace (3.6 > 1.9, p = 0.001), and force sensitivity (4.3 > 2.6, p < 0.001). The mean scores of intermediate subjects exceeded those of novices in dexterity (2.8 > 1.4, p = 0.002), field of view (2.8 > 1.8, p = 0.021), instrument visualization (3.2 > 2.2, p = 0.045), manipulator workspace (3.1 > 1.9, p = 0.004), and force sensitivity (3.7 > 2.6, p = 0.033). The mean scores of experienced subjects exceeded those of intermediates in dexterity (3.8 > 2.8, p = 0.003), field of view (4.1 > 2.8, p < 0.001), and instrument visualization (3.9 > 3.2, p = 0.044). Rater agreement in each domain demonstrated statistically significant concordance (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We present strong evidence for construct validity and interrater reliability of ARCS. Our study shows that learning curves for some console skills plateau faster than others. Therefore, ARCS may be more useful than GEARS to evaluate distinct console skills. Future studies will examine why some domains did not adequately differentiate between subjects and applications for intraoperative use.

The impact of robotics on the mode of benign hysterectomy and clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The impact of robotics on benign hysterectomy surgical approach, clinical outcomes, and learning curve is still unclear. METHODS: Review of abdominal, vaginal, laparoscopic, or robotic cases in 156 US hospitals in the Premier Research Database. RESULTS: Of 289 875 hysterectomies, abdominal cases decreased from 2005-2010 (60-33%) and minimally invasive approaches increased (40-67%). Conversion rates were: 0.04% for vaginal, 2.5% for robotic, and 7.2% for laparoscopy (P < 0.001). Robotic surgery time was longest (3.4 h vs. 2.2 vaginal, 2.5 abdominal, 2.7 laparoscopy, P < 0.001). Robotic complication rate was lowest (14.8% vs. 16.2% vaginal, 18.6% laparoscopy, 28.9% abdominal, P < 0.001). Hospital stay was longer following abdominal surgery (3.5 days vs. 1.8 robotic, 1.9 vaginal, 1.8 laparoscopy, P < 0.001). Robotic surgery times and conversion and complication rates improved with experience (2.8 h, 2%, and 13.9%, respectively), even with increasing complexity. CONCLUSIONS: Robotics was successfully incorporated without jeopardizing patient outcomes and increased the overall use of minimally invasive approaches.

Fertility and Symptom Relief following Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Myomectomy.

Objective. To examine success of robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy (RALM) measured by sustained symptom relief and fertility. Methods. This is a retrospective survey of 426 women who underwent RALM for fibroids, symptom relief, or infertility at three practice sites across the US. We examined rates of symptom recurrence and pregnancy and factors associated with these outcomes. Results. Overall, 70% of women reported being symptom-free, with 62.9% free of symptoms after three years. At >3 years, 66.7% of women who underwent surgery to treat infertility and 80% who were also symptom-free reported achieving pregnancy. Factors independently associated with symptom recurrence included greater time after surgery, preoperative dyspareunia, multiple fibroid surgeries, smoking after surgery, and preexisting diabetes. Factors positively correlated with achieving pregnancy included desiring pregnancy, prior pregnancy, greater time since surgery, and Caucasian race. Factors negatively correlated with pregnancy were advanced age and symptom recurrence. Conclusions. This paper, the first to examine symptom recurrence after RALM, demonstrates both short- and long-term effectiveness in providing symptom relief. Furthermore, RALM may have the potential to improve the chance of conception, even in a population at high risk of subfertility, with greater benefits among those who remain symptom-free. These findings require prospective validation.

The impact of different surgical modalities for hysterectomy on satisfaction and patient reported outcomes.

BACKGROUND: There is an ongoing debate regarding the cost-benefit of different surgical modalities for hysterectomy. Studies have relied primarily on evaluation of clinical outcomes and medical expenses. Thus, a paucity of information on patient-reported outcomes including satisfaction, recovery, and recommendations exists. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to identify differences in patient satisfaction and recommendations by approach to a hysterectomy. METHODS: We recruited a large, geographically diverse group of women who were members of an online hysterectomy support community. US women who had undergone a benign hysterectomy formed this retrospective study cohort. Self-reported characteristics and experiences were compared by surgical modality using chi-square tests. Outcomes over time were assessed with the Jonkheere-Terpstra trend test. Logistic regression identified independent predictors of patient satisfaction and recommendations. RESULTS: There were 6262 women who met the study criteria; 41.74% (2614/6262) underwent an abdominal hysterectomy, 10.64% (666/6262) were vaginal, 27.42% (1717/6262) laparoscopic, 18.94% (1186/6262) robotic, and 1.26% (79/6262) single-incision laparoscopic. Most women were at least college educated (56.37%, 3530/6262), and identified as white, non-Hispanic (83.17%, 5208/6262). Abdominal hysterectomy rates decreased from 68.2% (152/223) to 24.4% (75/307), and minimally invasive surgeries increased from 31.8% (71/223) to 75.6% (232/307) between 2001 or prior years and 2013 (P<.001 all trends). Trends in overall patient satisfaction and recommendations showed significant improvement over time (P<.001).There were differences across the surgical modalities in all patient-reported experiences (ie, satisfaction, time to walking, driving and working, and whether patients would recommend or use the same technique again; P<.001). Significantly better outcomes were evident among women who had vaginal, laparoscopic, and robotic procedures than among those who had an abdominal procedure. However, robotic surgery was the only approach that was an independent predictor of better patient experience; these patients were more satisfied overall (odds ratio [OR] 1.31, 95% CI 1.13-1.51) and on six other satisfaction measures, and more likely to recommend (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.39-1.94) and choose the same modality again (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.67-2.57). Abdominal hysterectomy patients were more dissatisfied with outcomes after surgery and less likely to recommend (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.31-0.40) or choose the same technique again (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.25-0.33). Quicker return to normal activities and surgery after 2007 also were independently associated with better overall satisfaction, willingness to recommend, and to choose the same surgery again. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with other US data, laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomy rates increased over time, with a concomitant decline in abdominal hysterectomy. While inherent shortcomings of this retrospective Web-based study exist, findings show that patient experience was better for each of the major minimally invasive approaches than for abdominal hysterectomy. However, robotic-assisted hysterectomy was the only modality that independently predicted greater satisfaction and willingness to recommend and have the same procedure again.

Learning curve assessment of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open-surgery controls from the premier perspective database.

INTRODUCTION: The primary aims of this study were to assess the learning curve effect of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in a large administrative database consisting of multiple U.S. hospitals and surgeons, and to compare the results of RARP with open radical prostatectomy (ORP) from the same settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The patient population of study was from the Premier Perspective Database (Premier, Inc., Charlotte, NC) and consisted of 71,312 radical prostatectomies performed at more than 300 U.S. hospitals by up to 3739 surgeons by open or robotic techniques from 2004 to 2010. The key endpoints were surgery time, inpatient length of stay, and overall complications. We compared open versus robotic, results by year of procedures, results by case volume of specific surgeons, and results of open surgery in hospitals with and without a robotic system. RESULTS: The mean surgery time was longer for RARP (4.4 hours, standard deviation [SD] 1.7) compared with ORP (3.4 hours, SD 1.5) in the same hospitals (p<0.0001). Inpatient stay was shorter for RARP (2.2 days, SD 1.9) compared with ORP (3.2 days, SD 2.7) in the same hospitals (p<0.0001). The overall complications were less for RARP (10.6%) compared with ORP (15.8%) in the same hospitals, as were transfusion rates. ORP results in hospitals without a robot were not better than ORP with a robot, and pretreatment co-morbidity profiles were similar in all cohorts. Trending of results by year of procedure showed no differences in the three cohorts, but trending of RARP results by surgeon experience showed improvements in surgery time, hospital stay, conversion rates, and complication rates. CONCLUSIONS: During the initial 7 years of RARP development, outcomes showed decreased hospital stay, complications, and transfusion rates. Learning curve trends for RARP were evident for these endpoints when grouped by surgeon experience, but not by year of surgery.

Docking of the da Vinci Si Surgical System® with single-site technology.

BACKGROUND: Strategies to spare operating room (OR) times are crucial to limiting the costs involved in robotic surgery. Among other factors, the pre-operative set-up and docking phases have been incriminated at first to be time consuming. The docking process on the standard multiport da Vinci Surgical System has not been shown to significantly prolong the overall OR time. This study aims to analyse whether the length of the docking process on the new da Vinci Si Surgical System with Single-Site™ technology remains acceptable. METHODS: We prospectively analysed all of the robotic single-incision cholecystectomies performed at our institution for docking and operating times during 2011-2012. The docking task load was assessed each time in a self-administered fashion by the docking surgeon using the NASA TLX visual scale. RESULTS: Sixty-four robotic single-incision cholecystectomies were included and analysed. The mean operative time was 78 min. Two surgeons with previous robotic surgery experience and a group of three less experienced robotic surgeons were responsible for docking the system. They performed 45, 10 and nine dockings, respectively. The overall mean docking time was 6.4 min with no significant difference between the groups. The docking process represented approximately 8% of the operating time. The surgeon with the most procedures showed significant progress in his docking times. The different task load parameters did not show a statistical difference between the three groups, with the exception of the frustration parameter, which was higher in the group of less experienced surgeons. There were significant correlations between docking times and the assessment of the various task load parameters. CONCLUSION: The docking process for a robotic single-incision cholecystectomy is learned rapidly and does not significantly increase the overall OR time.

Positive surgical margin and perioperative complication rates of primary surgical treatments for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing retropubic, laparoscopic, and robotic prostatectomy.

CONTEXT: Radical prostatectomy (RP) approaches have rarely been compared adequately with regard to margin and perioperative complication rates. OBJECTIVE: Review the literature from 2002 to 2010 and compare margin and perioperative complication rates for open retropubic RP (ORP), laparoscopic RP (LRP), and robot-assisted LRP (RALP). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Summary data were abstracted from 400 original research articles representing 167,184 ORP, 57,303 LRP, and 62,389 RALP patients (total: 286,876). Articles were found through PubMed and Scopus searches and met a priori inclusion criteria (eg, surgery after 1990, reporting margin rates and/or perioperative complications, study size>25 cases). The primary outcomes were positive surgical margin (PSM) rates, as well as total intra- and perioperative complication rates. Secondary outcomes included blood loss, transfusions, conversions, length of hospital stay, and rates for specific individual complications. Weighted averages were compared for each outcome using propensity adjustment. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: After propensity adjustment, the LRP group had higher positive surgical margin rates than the RALP group but similar rates to the ORP group. LRP and RALP showed significantly lower blood loss and transfusions, and a shorter length of hospital stay than the ORP group. Total perioperative complication rates were higher for ORP and LRP than for RALP. Total intraoperative complication rates were low for all modalities but lowest for RALP. Rates for readmission, reoperation, nerve, ureteral, and rectal injury, deep vein thrombosis, pneumonia, hematoma, lymphocele, anastomotic leak, fistula, and wound infection showed significant differences between groups, generally favoring RALP. The lack of randomized controlled trials, use of margin status as an indicator of oncologic control, and inability to perform cost comparisons are limitations of this study. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis demonstrates that RALP is at least equivalent to ORP or LRP in terms of margin rates and suggests that RALP provides certain advantages, especially regarding decreased adverse events.

Clinical and cost comparisons for hysterectomy via abdominal, standard laparoscopic, vaginal and robot-assisted approaches.

INTRODUCTION: The goal of this study was to compare outcomes and costs of four methods of hysterectomy: abdominal, standard laparoscopic, vaginal and robot-assisted approaches. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective medical chart review of 1474 consecutive hysterectomy patients with benign indications. RESULTS: Implementation of a robotics program at our institution resulted in reductions in abdominal (33 percent to 8 percent) and laparoscopic (29 percent to 5 percent) hysterectomies. Robotic surgery demonstrated the least blood loss and shortest hospital stays (both p < 0.0001), despite greater case complexity. Overall complication rates were highest for abdominal procedures (14 percent) and similar across minimally invasive approaches (8 to 9 percent). Conversion rates were four times greater in laparoscopic than vaginal or robotic hysterectomy (p = 0.01). Vaginal hysterectomy, performed in the least complex cases, had the lowest major complication rate (1.5 percent) and lowest costs. Costs for robotic surgery were similar to abdominal and laparoscopic approaches when robots were not depreciated as direct surgical expenses. CONCLUSIONS: Vaginal hysterectomy was the least expensive surgical option. Robotic surgery reduced morbidity, conversions and hospital stays even in complex cases, without incurring additional costs beyond purchase of the robotic system.

Mid-term biochemical recurrence-free outcomes following robotic versus laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

We compared 5-year biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free rates for robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). Three hundred and twelve consecutive patients who underwent RALP from 2003 to 2008 were compared to 97 consecutive LRP patients from 1999 to 2004. All laparoscopic surgeries were performed by one surgeon and robotic surgeries were performed by this surgeon or a laparoscopically naïve surgeon. Both groups were evaluated for perioperative outcome, pathologic status, and mid-term oncologic outcomes (5-year BCR-free rates at prostate-specific antigen [PSA] cutoffs of <0.4, <0.2, or <0.1 ng/ml). Baseline characteristics were equivalent except for age (61.9 years vs. 65.1 years, P < 0.0001). RALP operating time was shorter (215.5 min vs. 305.3, P < 0.0001), and resulted in fewer complications (3.8% vs. 10.3%, P = 0.0214) and blood transfusions (2.9% vs. 13.4%, P = 0.0003). Positive surgical margins were equivalent (pT2 20.9% vs. 28.8%, P = 0.1818). Overall 5-year BCR-free rates were comparable for RALP (97.6, 93.4, and 85.1%) and LRP (97.7, 89.7, and 79.7%) at PSA cutoff levels of <0.4, <0.2, and <0.1 ng/ml, respectively. There was a significant difference in BCR-free rates between the RALP and LRP groups for patients with organ-confined (pT2) disease at 0.2 ng/ml (96.4% vs. 88.7%, P = 0.0373) and 0.1 ng/ml (91.0% vs. 83.0%, P = 0.0470). We report lower morbidity, comparable pathologic outcome and improved mid-term oncologic results in patients with organ-confined disease after RALP in comparison to LRP.