Elective robotic-assisted bariatric surgery: Is it worth the money? A national database analysis

被引:23
|
作者
Pokala, Bhavani [1 ]
Samuel, Shradha [1 ]
Yanala, Ujwal [1 ]
Armijo, Priscila [1 ,2 ]
Kothari, Vishal [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Nebraska Med Ctr, Dept Surg, Gen Surg, Omaha, NE USA
[2] Univ Nebraska Med Ctr, Ctr Adv Surg Technol, Omaha, NE USA
来源
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY | 2020年 / 220卷 / 06期
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Bariatrics; Minimally invasive surgery; Cost; outcomes; Opiate use; Y GASTRIC BYPASS; CIRCULAR-STAPLED GASTROJEJUNOSTOMY; LAPAROSCOPIC-SLEEVE-GASTRECTOMY; FOLLOW-UP; COMPLICATIONS;
D O I
10.1016/j.amjsurg.2020.08.040
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: This study sought to evaluate surgical outcomes, cost, and opiate utilization between patients who underwent either laparoscopic or robotic-assisted bariatric procedures, including sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Methods: The Vizient administrative database was queried for patients admitted with mild to moderate severity of illness scores who underwent elective laparoscopic (L) and robotic-assisted (R) SG or RYGB from October 2015 through December 2018. Patients were grouped according to surgical approach for each bariatric procedure. Rates of overall complications, mortality, 30-day readmission, LOS, total direct cost, and opiate utilization were collected. Comparisons were performed within each bariatric procedure, between laparoscopic and robotic approaches, using IBM SPSS v.25.0, a = 0.05. Results: For SG, a total of 84,034 patients were included (LSG:N = 78,405; RSG:N = 5639). There was no significant difference in rates of overall complications (LSG:0.5%, RSG:0.4%; p = 0.872), mortality (LSG:<0.01%, RSG:<0.01%; p = 0.660), and 30-day readmissions (LSG: 0.5%, RSG:0.5%; p = 0.524). Average LOS was 1.65 1.07 days for LSG and 1.77 +/- 1.29 days for RSG (p=<0.001). Robotic approach had a significantly higher direct cost (LSG: $6505 +/- 3,200, RSG: $8018 +/- 3849; p= 0.001). Rate of opiate use was 97.3% for both groups (p= 0.05). For RYGB, 36,039 patients met the inclusion criteria (LRYGB:N = 33,053; RRYGB:N = 2986). There was no significant difference in rates of overall complications (LRYGB: 1.4%, RRYGB:1.3%; p = 0.414) or mortality (LRGYB:<0.01%, RRYGB: <0.01%; p = 0.646). Robotic approach was associated with a lower 30-day readmission rate (LRYGB: 1.3%, RRYGB:<0.01%; p=<0.001). Average LOS was 2.1 +/- 2.18 days for LRYGB and 2.18 +/- 3.78 days for RRYGB (p = 0.075). Robotic approach had a significantly higher direct cost (LRYGB:$8564 +/- 5,350, RRYGB: $10,325 +/- 7689; p=<0.001) and rate of opiate use (LRYG:95.75%, RRYGB:96.85%; p = 0.005). Conclusion: Our study found the direct cost of RSG to be significantly higher than LSG with no added clinical benefit, therefore, universal use of the robotic platform for routine SG cases remains difficult to justify. While the direct cost of RRYGB was also higher than LRYGB, the significantly lower readmission rate associated with robotic approach may help to offset the financial discrepancy and warrant its use. (c) 2020 Published by Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:1445 / 1450
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Robotic-assisted surgery
    Huguier, Michel
    BULLETIN DE L ACADEMIE NATIONALE DE MEDECINE, 2017, 201 (7-9): : 1041 - 1044
  • [22] DaVinci® Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery: Is it Justified in a Routine Setting?
    Gilbert Mühlmann
    Alexander Klaus
    Werner Kirchmayr
    Heinz Wykypiel
    Andreas Unger
    Elisabeth Höller
    Hermann Nehoda
    Franz Aigner
    Helmut G Weiss
    Obesity Surgery, 2003, 13 : 848 - 854
  • [23] DOES ROBOTIC-ASSISTED SURGERY IMPROVE THE OUTCOMES OF REVISIONAL BARIATRIC PROCEDURES?
    Castillo-Larios, Rocio
    Cornejo, Jorge
    Gunturu, Naga Swati
    Cheng, Yilon Lima
    Elli, Enrique Fernando
    OBESITY SURGERY, 2023, 33 : 91 - 91
  • [24] DaVinci® robotic-assisted laparoscopic bariatric surgery:: Is it justified in a routine setting?
    Mühlmann, G
    Klaus, A
    Kirchmayr, W
    Wykypiel, H
    Unger, A
    Höller, E
    Nehoda, H
    Aigner, F
    Weiss, HG
    OBESITY SURGERY, 2003, 13 (06) : 848 - 854
  • [25] LAPAROSCOPIC ROBOTIC-ASSISTED REVISION OF GASTROJEJUNOSTOMY FOR A GIANT ANASTOMOTIC ULCER Robotic bariatric surgery
    Almerey, T.
    Elli, E.
    OBESITY SURGERY, 2017, 27 : 1183 - 1183
  • [26] Robotic-Assisted Bariatric Surgery Is Associated with Increased Postoperative Complications Compared to Laparoscopic: a Nationwide Readmissions Database Study
    Klock, Julie A.
    Bremer, Kristin
    Niu, Fang
    Walters, Ryan W.
    Nandipati, Kalyana C.
    OBESITY SURGERY, 2023, 33 (07) : 2186 - 2193
  • [27] Robotic-Assisted Bariatric Surgery Is Associated with Increased Postoperative Complications Compared to Laparoscopic: a Nationwide Readmissions Database Study
    Julie A. Klock
    Kristin Bremer
    Fang Niu
    Ryan W. Walters
    Kalyana C. Nandipati
    Obesity Surgery, 2023, 33 : 2186 - 2193
  • [28] MAUDE: Analysis of Robotic-Assisted Gynecologic Surgery
    Manoucheri, Elmira
    Fuchs-Weizman, Noga
    Cohen, Sarah L.
    Wang, Karen C.
    Einarsson, Jon
    JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE GYNECOLOGY, 2014, 21 (04) : 592 - 595
  • [29] Robotic-Assisted Surgery Results in a Shorter Hospital Stay Following Revisional Bariatric Surgery
    King, Keith
    Galvez, Alvaro
    Stoltzfus, Jill
    Claros, Leonardo
    El Chaar, Maher
    OBESITY SURGERY, 2021, 31 (02) : 634 - 639
  • [30] Robotic-Assisted Surgery Results in a Shorter Hospital Stay Following Revisional Bariatric Surgery
    Keith King
    Alvaro Galvez
    Jill Stoltzfus
    Leonardo Claros
    Maher El Chaar
    Obesity Surgery, 2021, 31 : 634 - 639