Nationwide outcomes and costs of laparoscopic and robotic vs. open hepatectomy.

The safety of hepatectomy continues to improve and it holds a key role in the management of benign and malignant hepatic lesions. Laparoscopic and robotic approaches to hepatectomy are increasingly utilized. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes and costs of laparoscopic and robotic vs. open approaches to hepatectomy and to determine the national nonelective postoperative readmission rate, including readmission to other hospitals. The Nationwide Readmission Database from 2013 to 2014 was queried for all patients undergoing hepatectomy. Patients undergoing laparoscopic and robotic hepatectomies were compared to patients undergoing open hepatectomy. Multivariate logistic regression was implemented to determine the odds ratios (OR) for non-elective readmission within 45 days. There were 10,870 patients who underwent hepatectomy from 2013 to 2014 and 724 (6.7%) were approached with laparoscopic or robotic technique. The robotic cohort had lower mean cost of the index admission ($24,983 ± $18,329 vs. open $32,391 ± $31,983, p < 0.001, 95% CI - 18,292 to 534), shorter LOS (4.5 ± 3.8 vs. lap 6.8 ± 6.0 vs. open 7.6 ± 7.7 days, p < 0.01), and were less likely to be readmitted within 45 days (7.9% vs. 13.0% lap vs. 13.8% open, p = 0.05). The robotic cohort was slightly younger (mean age 57.5 ± 13.5 vs. lap 60.1 ± 13.8 vs. open 58.9 ± 13.7, p < 0.05), and no significant differences were seen by Charlson Comorbidity Index. Anastomosis of hepatic duct to GI tract carried higher odds of mortality (OR 2.87, p < 0.01) and higher odds of readmission (OR 1.40, p < 0.01). LOS above 7 days increased odds of readmission (OR 2.24, p < 0.01). Nearly one-fifth of patients readmitted after hepatectomy present to a different hospital. Robotic hepatectomy was associated with favorable cost and readmission outcomes compared to laparoscopic and open hepatectomy patients, despite similar patient comorbid burdens and patient's age. Length of stay over 7 days and anastomosis of hepatic duct to GI tract are strong risk factors for readmission and mortality.

Robotic paraesophageal hernia repair: a single-center experience and systematic review.

Robotic Surgery is becoming increasingly used in general surgery. The objective of this study is to evaluate the safety, effectiveness and short-term (less than 1 year) outcomes of Robotic Paraesophageal Hernia (RPEH) Surgery using the DaVinci Surgical Robot system (Intuitive Surgical, CA) in a large community hospital. This is a retrospective cohort study of 28 consecutive patients who underwent robotic paraesophageal hernia repair January 2011-March 2013 in this institution. Data and outcomes collected for analysis include patient demographics, operating times, conversion, complications, mortality and recurrence. The mean age of the patients was 68.7 +/- 12.7 years, 82% were females and the mean BMI was 29 +/- 6.3. The mean operative time, including the robot docking time, was 83.6 + 24 min. The average length of hospital stay (LOS) was 2.8 +/- 1.9 days. There were no conversions to open or laparoscopic procedures. Postoperative complications were noted in 3 patients (10.7%), including one mortality (3.4%). One symptomatic recurrence (3.4%) was noted during the 12-month follow-up period. Robotic Paraesophageal repair is a safe (similar rate of complication and mortality to literature for laparoscopic procedure) and an effective (paraeshopageal hernia repaired without high recurrence) procedure with acceptable complication rates even in older patients with high operative risks.

Cosmesis, patient satisfaction, and quality of life after da Vinci Single-Site cholecystectomy and multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: short-term results from a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy evolved from the traditional multiport laparoscopic technique. Prior trials have demonstrated improved cosmesis with the single-incision technique. Robotic single-site surgery minimizes the technical difficulties associated with laparoscopic single-incision approach. This is the first prospective, randomized, controlled study comparing robotic single-site cholecystectomy (RSSC) and multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (MPLC) in terms of cosmesis and patient satisfaction. METHODS: Patients with symptomatic benign gallbladder disease were randomized to RSSC or MPLC. Data included perioperative variables such as operative time, conversion and complications and cosmesis satisfaction, body image perception, quality of life using validated questionnaires, at postoperative visits of 2, 6 weeks and 3 months. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-six patients were randomized to RSSC (N = 83) and MPLC (N = 53) at 8 institutions. Both cohorts were dominated by higher enrollment of females (RSSC = 78%, MPLC = 92%). The RSSC and MPLC cohorts were otherwise statistically matched. Operative time was longer for RSSC (61 min vs. 44 min, P < 0.0001). There were no differences in complication rates. RSSC demonstrated a significant superiority in cosmesis satisfaction and body image perception (P value < 0.05 at every follow-up). There was no statistically significant difference in patient-reported quality of life. Multivariate analysis of female patients demonstrated significantly higher preference for RSSC over MPLC in cosmesis satisfaction and body image perception with no difference seen in overall quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this trial show that RSSC is associated with improved cosmesis satisfaction and body image perception without a difference in observed complication rate. The uncompromised safety and the improved cosmesis satisfaction and body image perception provided by RSSC for female patients support consideration of the robotic single-site approach. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01932216.

Clinical outcomes and cost-benefit analysis comparing laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of minimally invasive platforms for colorectal surgery-laparoscopy and more recently robotics-allows for smaller incisions, shortened hospital stay, less postoperative pain, and quicker return to normal activity. There exists a lack of evidence-based knowledge comparing the clinical outcomes and cost-benefit analysis of the different types of minimally invasive surgery. The aim of this study was to analyze and compare the short-term clinical outcomes and overall hospital costs between laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery. METHODS: After IRB approval, we conducted a retrospective chart review from 131 patients who underwent laparoscopic colorectal surgery and 96 patients who underwent robotic colorectal surgery. Data analyzed included pertinent patient demographics, operative times (OR times), conversion rates, postoperative pathology, complications, length of hospital stay, 90-day readmission rates, 30-day mortality, and overall hospital costs. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-seven patients were included-laparoscopic (N = 131) and robotic (N = 96) colorectal surgeries. Mean age of patients in the laparoscopic versus robotic cohort was 70.9 vs 63.6 years, (p < 0.001). Around 62 % were operated on for malignant disease. Mean OR time was 113 min for laparoscopy and 109 min for robotics, p = 0.59. Conversion rates were comparable. Mean length of hospital stay (6.6 vs 5.7 days) and postoperative complications (3.2 vs 7 %) were comparable between the laparoscopic and robotic arms. Overall hospital charges were $114,853 for laparoscopy and $107,220 for robotics, and no significant difference was noted (p = 0.448, NS). CONCLUSION: Robotic colectomies were comparable to laparoscopic colectomies in terms of overall hospital charges and short-term clinical outcomes, including length of stay and conversion rates. Robotic surgery was favored for left-sided colectomy. With shorter learning curves and wider availability, robotic approach offers a safe and economically feasible minimally invasive platform for complex colorectal resections.

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colonic disease: a meta-analysis of postoperative variables.

INTRODUCTION: An increasing number of studies have been published since the introduction of robotic technology into general surgery. Gastrointestinal surgery is an area of special interest for the robotic surgeon. Colonic surgery can be challenging depending on the disease and the operative approach. We seek to perform a meta-analysis comparing robotic surgery against laparoscopic surgery in this particular field. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a systematic search of MEDLINE database from January 2001 to July 2013 supplemented by manual searches of bibliographies of key relevant articles. Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies were selected for review and for collection of postoperative data (length of stay, time to first flatus and complications). RESULTS: After careful review, nine studies were considered for analysis. Non-pooled data showed a slight trend toward laparoscopy with increased number of events without statistical significance. Pooled data demonstrated a statistical significance for return to bowel function in the right and mixed robotic colectomy arm (WSMD -0.33, 95 % CI -0.5, -0.1; p < 0.005 and WSMD -0.26, 95 % CI -0.51, 0.0; p = 0.05). Pooled data of length of stay and complications showed no statistical significance between robotic and laparoscopic colonic surgery. DISCUSSION: Robotic surgery is a comparable option when dealing with colonic disease, either benign or malignant. No difference in complication rate or length of stay was found when comparing the two. Robotic surgery appears to have an advantage over laparoscopy in regards to return of bowel function when dealing with right colectomies.