A retrospective comparison of robotic cholecystectomy versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: operative outcomes and cost analysis

Initial experience of benign upper gastrointestinal robotic-assisted surgery: first 200 cases and early postoperative outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Robotic-assisted surgery is an alternative approach to minimally invasive surgery for benign upper gastrointestinal (UGI) conditions and abdominal wall hernia - its application in the United Kingdom is still in the initial phases in many National Health Service (NHS) trusts. We detail the experience of Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust in implementing a robotic-assisted surgery service for benign UGI procedures and abdominal wall hernia repair.

METHODS

The robotic service for benign UGI was established in the trust in February 2022. All theatre staff received online and simulation training before working in the dedicated robotic surgery theatre. Operative timings, surgical outcome measures and patient outcomes including day-case rates were prospectively recorded and analysed to assess the impact of the introduction of this service.

RESULTS

Between February 2022 and June 2023, some 200 robotic-assisted procedures were performed: cholecystectomy (n = 103), hernia repair (n = 74), anti-reflux surgery (n = 9) and Heller's myotomy (n = 14). Median docking times were recorded: cholecystectomy, 9min (4-94min); hernia repair, 10min (4-50min); anti-reflux surgery, 19min (9-37min); and Heller's myotomy, 15min (6-26min). There were no intraoperative complications. Two patients returned to theatre for bile leak following cholecystectomy, presenting on day 2 and day 9 postoperatively.

DISCUSSION

Robotic-assisted benign UGI surgery can be safely performed in a day-case centre and does not impact day-case rates. There were no theatre delays because of prolonged docking times, even in the initial introductory period. There are higher costs associated with robotic-assisted surgery; however, with time and industry development, these are likely to improve.

Impact of the robotic platform and surgeon variation on cholecystectomy disposable costs-More is not better

BACKGROUND

We hypothesized that surgeon variation in equipment and platform during cholecystectomy would increase costs without measurable benefit.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all cholecystectomies from a large health care system. Using a mixed model, we modeled disposable instrument costs and outcomes. Independent variables included patient, hospital, surgeon factors and the surgical platform.

RESULTS

From 2017 to 2024, we analyzed 13,548 laparoscopic cholecystectomies and 1,258 robotic cholecystectomies performed by 98 surgeons across 14 hospitals. The proportion of robotic cholecystectomy usage increased from 0.1% in 2017 to 26% (522 of 2021) in 2024. The unadjusted disposable cost (mean, median, and the 25th percentile) was $669 ± $4.2, $534, and $448 for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and $1,447 ± $18, $1,309, and $1,120 for robotic cholecystectomy, respectively. The cheapest surgeon's mean cost was $272 ± $37 (n = 16), and the most expensive was $1,934 ± $108 (n = 223), both laparoscopic only. For robotic cholecystectomies, the least costly surgeon averaged $1,062 ± $23 (n = 52). Using our mixed models, robotic cholecystectomy was on average $817 ± $22 more expensive than laparoscopic cholecystectomy (P < .001); there was no meaningful difference in mean operating room times, readmission rates, length of stay, or 30-day reintervention rate between surgical platforms. However, robotic cholecystectomies predicted a substantially lower conversion rate (odds ratio: 0.20 ± 0.11, P = .004) or $93,000 per conversion prevented. If all surgeons operated at the 25th percentile of a platform's mean cost, a potential disposal equipment savings of 35% for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and 24% for robotic cholecystectomy could be realized.

CONCLUSION

Robotic cholecystectomy costs were 2.5 times greater than those for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. In addition, surgeons' disposable equipment choices also substantially impact cholecystectomy costs. Neither platform nor excess costs provide any substantial measurable outcome benefit.

Patient Complexity and Bile Duct Injury After Robotic-Assisted vs Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Importance

Recent evidence suggests higher bile duct injury rates for patients undergoing robotic-assisted cholecystectomy compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Proponents of the robotic-assisted approach contend that this may be due to selection of higher-risk and more complex patients being offered robotic-assisted cholecystectomy.

Objective

To evaluate the comparative safety of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy among patients with varying levels of risk for adverse postoperative outcomes.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study assessed fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries aged 66 to 99 years who underwent cholecystectomy between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2021. Data analysis was performed between June and August 2024. Medicare beneficiaries were separated into model training and experimental cohorts (60% and 40%, respectively). Random forest modeling and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator techniques were then used in a risk model training cohort to stratify beneficiaries based on their risk of a composite outcome of postoperative adverse events consisting of 90-day postoperative complications, serious complications, reoperations, and rehospitalization in an independent experimental cohort.

Exposures

Robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome of interest was bile duct injury requiring operative intervention after cholecystectomy. Secondary outcomes were composite outcomes from cholecystectomy composed of any complications, serious complications, reoperations, and readmissions.

Results

A total of 737 908 individuals (mean [SD] age, 74.7 [9.9] years; 387 563 [52.5%] female) were included, with 295 807 in an experimental cohort and 442 101 in a training cohort. Bile duct injury was higher among patients undergoing robotic-assisted compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy in each subgroup (low-risk group: relative risk [RR], 3.14; 95% CI, 2.35-3.94; medium-risk group: RR, 3.13; 95% CI, 2.35-3.92; and high-risk group: RR, 3.11; 95% CI, 2.34-3.88). Overall, composite outcomes between the 2 groups were similar for robotic-assisted cholecystectomy compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (RR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.07-1.12), aside from reoperation, which was overall higher in the robotic-assisted group compared with the laparoscopic group (RR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.35-1.59).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries, bile duct injury rates were higher among low-, medium-, and high-risk surgical candidates after robotic-assisted cholecystectomy. These findings suggest that patient selection may not be the cause of differences in bile duct injury rates among patients undergoing robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Robotic compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program comparative analysis

BACKGROUND

Data demonstrating the clinical benefit of robotic cholecystectomy over the laparoscopic approach are lacking. Herein, we aim to evaluate whether robotic cholecystectomy is associated with improved surgical outcomes compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study that used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program to compare the outcomes of patients who underwent robotic or laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign indications in 2022.

RESULTS

Of the 59,216 patients identified, 53,746 underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy and 5,470 robotic. Compared with the robotic cohort, the patients in the laparoscopic cholecystectomy group were older (50.4 vs 49.7 years), were of the male sex (32.7% vs 29.7%), and comprised a greater percentage of other races than White, African American, and Asian (28.6% vs 14.8%). Multivariable logistic regression revealed that robotic cholecystectomy compared with the laparoscopic approach was independently associated with a lower risk of Clavien-Dindo complications grade 3 or 4 (odds ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.98), a lower rate of conversion to open (odds ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.61), and lower odds of requiring hospitalization ≥24 hours (odds ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.81). There were no significant differences between the 2 approaches in terms of reoperation (odds ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-1.00) and readmission (odds ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-1.10).

CONCLUSION

Robotic cholecystectomy was independently associated with a lower risk of serious complications, lower rate conversion to open, and hospitalization ≥24 hours compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. These findings suggest that new technologies might enhance the safety of minimally invasive surgery.

Efficacy of Chewing Xylitol Gum on Restoring Postoperative Bowel Activity After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Three-arm Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

The aim in the present study was to evaluate the effects of chewing postoperative xylitol gum on gastrointestinal functional recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

DESIGN

A three-arm randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

After a baseline assessment, participants were randomly assigned in three groups. The random assignment was performed by using a computer program (Microsoft Excel 2016). Afterward, participants were categorized into three subgroups. Group 3 was the control group that consisted of participants who had no intervention for chewing gum (n = 25). Group 2 was xylitol-free gum chewing group (n = 25), whereas Group 1 was xylitol gum chewing group (n = 24). In later phases, the time to first postsurgical flatus, time to first bowel sound after surgery, time to first postsurgical defecation, time to first mobilization after surgery, and discharge time from hospital were recorded. Nausea and vomiting, which are among the postoperative symptoms, were also evaluated.

FINDINGS

The duration of the control group from the end of surgery to the flatulence and bowel sounds was statistically higher than the xylitol group and xylitol-free group (all P < .05). Also, first postoperative flatulence time of xylitol-free group was higher than the xylitol group (P < .05). The duration from the end of surgery to defecation was longer in the control group compared with the xylitol group and the xylitol-free group, with a statistically significant difference between the groups (P < .05). In this study, a statistically significant difference was observed in terms of the time to first postsurgical flatus, time to first bowel sound after surgery, and time to first postsurgical defecation (all P < .000). No significant difference was found between the xylitol group, xylitol-free group, and control group when discharge from hospital and mobilization times were analyzed (all of them are P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Chewing xylitol gum facilitates postoperative gastrointestinal recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Further studies are recommended to confirm these findings and investigate the underlying mechanisms.

A Retrospective, Observational and Descriptive Study of 111 Ventral Hernia Repairs: Is the Open Approach Already over the Hill?

Objectives: Incisional ventral hernia repair remains a challenging surgery for abdominal wall surgeons. We report the results at 48 months post-surgery regarding open ventral hernia repair (OVHR), analyzing the recurrence rate and incidence of chronic pain. Methods: This was a retrospective, observational study of 111 consecutive patients who underwent OVHR. Between January 2017 and December 2019, patient data were collected from a database and classified by hernia type. Through questionnaires and clinical examinations, the recurrence rate and incidence of chronic pain (measured using the VAS score and a Likert scale) were obtained. Results: In all patients, the hernia repair was performed via an open approach. Long-term follow-up (48 months after surgery) revealed that 20% of patients experienced mild chronic pain alongside the flanks, and the recurrence rate was 5%. Moreover, long-term follow-up revealed the following secondary outcomes: movement limitations in sports were reported in 7% of patients, and movement limitations during long walking were reported in 11% of patients. Conclusions: Our technique for OVHR is a safe procedure with a low rate of recurrence and chronic pain. Our future aim is to organize a prospective study.

Evolution of minimally invasive cholecystectomy: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy, being a prevalent abdominal surgical procedure, has transitioned through various innovative stages aimed at reducing the procedure's invasiveness. These stages encompass Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (SILC), Mini Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (MLC), Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (NOTES), and Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (RALC). The purpose of this review is to trace the evolution of minimally invasive cholecystectomy techniques, assess their status, and identify emerging trends and challenges in the field.

METHOD

An extensive review was performed to explore the evolution and characteristics of SILC, MLC, NOTES, and RALC. The approach involved an in-depth examination of literature available on PubMed, coupled with a critical assessment of surgical outcomes, associated complications, and technical hurdles posed by these methods.

RESULTS

SILC, despite its potential for reduced scarring, exhibits an elevated risk of bile duct damage and incisional hernia occurrences. MLC, mirroring the standard technique closely, presents minor benefits without amplifying postoperative complications, hence, positing itself as a feasible choice for routine elective cholecystectomy. NOTES, although still facing technical challenges, the hybrid transvaginal procedure is gaining clinical interest. RALC, heralded for its augmented precision and dexterity, emerges as a potential future avenue, although necessitating further exploration to ascertain its efficacy and safety.

CONCLUSION

The progression of laparoscopic cholecystectomy methodologies embodies the surgical society's aspiration to minimize invasiveness whilst enhancing patient outcomes. This review endeavors to offer a structured discourse on SILC, MLC, NOTES, and RALC, aspiring to aid the ongoing deliberation on the judicious selection of surgical techniques in clinical practice.

Collaborative Implementation of Robotic Surgery Into an Academic Pediatric Surgery Practice

INTRODUCTION

Robotic surgery continues to drive evolution in minimally invasive surgery. Due to the confined operative fields encountered, pediatric surgeons may uniquely benefit from the precise control offered by robotic technologies compared to open and laparoscopic techniques. We describe a unique collaborative implementation of robotic surgery into an academic pediatric surgery practice through adult robotic surgeon partnership. We compare robotic cholecystectomy (RC) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) outcomes, hypothesizing that RC will be equivalent to LC in key quality outcomes.

METHODS

We evaluate 14 mo of systems development and training, and 24 mo of collaborative operative experience evoking a purposeful tiered case progression, establishing core robotic competencies, prior to advancing operative complexity. Univariate analyses compared LC versus RC.

RESULTS

36 robotic operations were performed in children aged 8-18 y, in a tiered progression from 24 cholecystectomies to 2 ileocecectomies, 2 paraesophageal hernia repairs, 1 anterior rectopexy, 1 spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy, 1 Heller myotomy, 1 choledochal cyst resection with roux-en-y hepaticojejunostomy, 1 median arcuate ligament release, and 1 thoracic esophageal duplication cyst resection. For LC and RC, there were no significant differences in procedure duration, discharge opioids, hospital readmission, or rates of surgical site infection or bile duct injury.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic surgery has potential to significantly enhance pediatric surgery. RC appears equivalent to LC but presents multiple additional theoretical benefits in pediatric patients. Our pilot program experience supports the feasibility and safety of pediatric robotic surgery. We emphasize the importance of a stepwise progression in operative difficulty and collaboration with adult robotic surgery experts.

Robotic, laparoscopic and open surgery for gallbladder cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Minimally invasive oncological resections have become increasingly widespread in the surgical management of cancers. However, the role of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for gallbladder cancer (GBC) remains unclear. We aim to perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis of existing literature to evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic and robotic surgery in the management of GBC compared to open surgery (OS) by comparing outcomes.

METHODS

A literature search of the PubMed/MEDLINE (2000 to December 2021) and EMBASE (2000 to December 2021) databases was conducted. The primary outcome studied was overall survival, and secondary outcomes studied were postoperative morbidity, severe complications, incidence of bile leak, length of hospital stay, operation time, R0 resection rate, local recurrence and lymph node yield.

RESULTS

Thirty-two full-text articles met the eligibility criteria and were included in the final analysis with a total of 5883 patients undergoing either OS or MIS (laparoscopic or robotic) for GBC. 1- and 2-stage meta-analyses did not reveal any significant differences between OS, laparoscopic and robotic surgery in terms of overall survival, R0 resection, lymph node harvest, local recurrence and post-operative complications. Patients who underwent OS had significantly longer hospitalization stay and intra-operative blood loss compared to those who underwent laparoscopic or robotic surgery. Network meta-analysis did not reveal any significant differences between post-operative and survival outcomes of laparoscopic vs robotic surgery groups.

CONCLUSION

This network meta-analysis suggests that both laparoscopic and robotic surgery are safe and effective approaches in the surgical management of GBC, with post-operative and survival outcomes comparable to OS. An MIS approach may also lead to shorter hospitalization stay, less intraoperative blood loss and post-operative complications compared to OS. There was no obvious benefit of either MIS approach (laparoscopic versus robotic) over the other.

Robotic versus laparoscopic general surgery in the emergency setting: a systematic review

Robot-assisted general surgery, an advanced technology in minimally invasive procedures, is increasingly employed in elective general surgery, showing benefits over laparoscopy in specific cases. Although laparoscopy remains a standard approach for common acute abdominal conditions, the role of robotic surgery in emergency general surgery remains uncertain. This systematic review aims to compare outcomes in acute general surgery settings for robotic versus laparoscopic surgeries. A PRISMA-compliant systematic search across MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and the Cochrane Library was conducted. The literature review focused on articles comparing perioperative outcomes of emergency general surgery managed laparoscopically versus robot-assisted. A descriptive analysis was performed, and outcome measures were recorded. Six articles, involving 1,063 patients, compared outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic procedures. Two articles covered cholecystectomies, while the others addressed ileocaecal resection, subtotal colectomy, hiatal hernia and repair of perforated gastrojejunal ulcers. The level of evidence was low. Laparoscopic bowel resection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) had higher complications; no significant differences were found in complications for other operations. Operative time showed no differences for cholecystectomies, but robotic approaches took longer for other procedures. Robotic cases had shorter hospital length of stay, although the associated costs were significantly higher. Perioperative outcomes for emergency robotic surgery in selected general surgery conditions are comparable to laparoscopic surgery. However, recommending robotic surgery in the acute setting necessitates a well-powered large population study for stronger evidence.

Temporal Analysis of the Incidence, Mortality and Disability-Adjusted Life Years of Benign Gallbladder and Biliary Diseases in High-Income Nations, 1990-2019

Objective

The aim of this observational study was to analyze trends in the incidence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) of benign gallbladder and biliary diseases across high-income countries between 1990 and 2019.

Background

Benign gallbladder and biliary diseases place a substantial burden on healthcare systems in high-income countries. Accurate characterization of the disease burden may help optimize healthcare policy and resource distribution.

Materials and methods

Age-standardized incidence rates (ASIRs), age-standardized mortality rates (ASMRs), and DALYs data for gallbladder and biliary diseases in males and females were extracted from the 2019 Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study. A mortality-incidence index (MII) was also calculated. Joinpoint regression analysis was performed.

Results

The median ASIRs across the European Union 15+ countries in 2019 were 758/100,000 for females and 282/100,000 for males. Between 1990 and 2019 the median percentage change in ASIR was +2.49% for females and +1.07% for males. The median ASMRs in 2019 were 1.22/100,000 for females and 1.49/100,000 for males with a median percentage change over the observation period of -21.93% and -23.01%, respectively. In 2019, the median DALYs was 65/100,000 for females and 37/100,000 among males, with comparable percentage decreases over the observation period of -21.27% and -19.23%, respectively.

Conclusions

International variation in lifestyle factors, diagnostic and management strategies likely account for national and sex disparities. This study highlights the importance of ongoing clinical efforts to optimize treatment pathways for gallbladder and biliary diseases, particularly in the provision of emergency surgical services and efforts to address population risk factors.

Is implementation of robotic-assisted procedures in acute care general surgery cost-effective?

Over the past 2 decades, the use and importance of robotic surgery in minimally invasive surgery has increased. Across various surgical specialties, robotic technology has gained popularity through its use of 3D visualization, optimal ergonomic positioning, and precise instrument manipulation. This growing interest has also been seen in acute care surgery, where laparoscopic procedures are used more frequently. Despite the growing popularity of robotic surgery in the acute care surgical realm, there is very little research on the utility of robotics regarding its effects on health outcomes and cost-effectiveness. The current literature indicates some value in utilizing robotic technology in specific urgent procedures, such as cholecystectomies and incarcerated hernia repairs; however, the high cost of robotic surgery was found to be a potential barrier to its widespread use in acute care surgery. This narrative literature review aims to determine the cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in surgical procedures that are often done in urgent settings: cholecystectomies, inguinal hernia repair, ventral hernia repair, and appendectomies.

Gallbladder cancer: surgical treatment, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy

Gallbladder cancer is a common type of biliary tract tumor. Optimal management for early stage cases typically involves radical excision as the primary treatment modality. Various surgical techniques, including laparoscopic, robotic, and navigational surgery, have demonstrated favorable clinical outcomes in radical gallbladder excision. Unfortunately, most patients are ineligible for surgical intervention because of the advanced stage of the disease upon diagnosis. Consequently, non-surgical interventions, such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy, have become the mainstay of treatment for patients in advanced stages. This review focuses on elucidating various surgical techniques as well as advancements in immunotherapy and targeted therapy in the context of recent advancements in gallbladder cancer research.

Comparative Safety of Robotic-Assisted vs Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Importance

Robotic-assisted cholecystectomy is rapidly being adopted into practice, partly based on the belief that it offers specific technical and safety advantages over traditional laparoscopic surgery. Whether robotic-assisted cholecystectomy is safer than laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains unclear.

Objective

To determine the uptake of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy and to analyze its comparative safety vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study used Medicare administrative claims data for nonfederal acute care hospitals from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2019. Participants included 1 026 088 fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries 66 to 99 years of age who underwent cholecystectomy with continuous Medicare coverage for 3 months before and 12 months after surgery. Data were analyzed August 17, 2022, to June 1, 2023.

Exposure

Surgical technique used to perform cholecystectomy: robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic approaches.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was rate of bile duct injury requiring definitive surgical reconstruction within 1 year after cholecystectomy. Secondary outcomes were composite outcome of bile duct injury requiring less-invasive postoperative surgical or endoscopic biliary interventions, and overall incidence of 30-day complications. Multivariable logistic analysis was performed adjusting for patient factors and clustered within hospital referral regions. An instrumental variable analysis was performed, leveraging regional variation in the adoption of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy within hospital referral regions over time, to account for potential confounding from unmeasured differences between treatment groups.

Results

A total of 1 026 088 patients (mean [SD] age, 72 [12.0] years; 53.3% women) were included in the study. The use of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy increased 37-fold from 211 of 147 341 patients (0.1%) in 2010 to 6507 of 125 211 patients (5.2%) in 2019. Compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy, robotic-assisted cholecystectomy was associated with a higher rate of bile duct injury necessitating a definitive operative repair within 1 year (0.7% vs 0.2%; relative risk [RR], 3.16 [95% CI, 2.57-3.75]). Robotic-assisted cholecystectomy was also associated with a higher rate of postoperative biliary interventions, such as endoscopic stenting (7.4% vs 6.0%; RR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.16-1.33]). There was no significant difference in overall 30-day complication rates between the 2 procedures. The instrumental variable analysis, which was designed to account for potential unmeasured differences in treatment groups, also showed that robotic-assisted cholecystectomy was associated with a higher rate of bile duct injury (0.4% vs 0.2%; RR, 1.88 [95% CI, 1.14-2.63]).

Conclusions and Relevance

This cohort study's finding of significantly higher rates of bile duct injury with robotic-assisted cholecystectomy compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy suggests that the utility of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy should be reconsidered, given the existence of an already minimally invasive, predictably safe laparoscopic approach.

A retrospective study of laparoscopic, robotic-assisted, and open emergent/urgent cholecystectomy based on the PINC AI Healthcare Database 2017-2020

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted cholecystectomy (RAC) is becoming increasingly common, but the outcomes of emergent/urgent robotic-assisted cholecystectomies compared to emergent laparoscopic (LC) and open cholecystectomies (OC) remain understudied.

METHODS

The PINC AI Healthcare Database was queried to identify adults who underwent emergent or urgent (Em-Ur) cholecystectomy between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2020. Immediate postoperative and 30-day outcomes were identified including intraoperative complications, transfusion, conversion, postoperative complication, and hospital length of stay. Propensity score matching was done to compare outcomes between Em-Ur robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open cholecystectomies Subgroup analyses were performed comparing RAC done with and without fluorescent imaging as well as comparing RAC and LC performed for patients with class 3 obesity (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2).

RESULTS

RAC Em-Ur cholecystectomies are being performed with increasing frequency and is the most utilized modality for patients with class 3 obesity. There was no difference in intraoperative complications (0.3%), bile duct injury (0.2%), or postoperative outcomes between RAC and LC. LC had significantly shorter operating room times (96 min (75,128)) compared to RAC (120 min (90,150)). There was a significant lower rate of conversion to open in RAC (1.9%) relative to LC (3.2%) in both the overall population and the class 3 obesity sub-analysis (RAC-2.6% vs. LC-4.4%). There was no difference in outcomes in robotic-assisted cholecystectomies done with and without fluorescent imaging.

CONCLUSIONS

A comparison of propensity score-matched cohorts of emergent/urgent robotic-assisted and laparoscopic cholecystectomy indicates that robotic-assisted cholecystectomy is a safe alternative to laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and that both have superior outcomes to open cholecystectomies.

Development of a prospective biliary dashboard to compare performance and surgical cost

BACKGROUND

Transparency around surgeon level data may align healthcare delivery with quality care for patients. Biliary surgery includes numerous procedures performed by both general surgeons and subspecialists alike. Cholecystectomy is a common surgical procedure and an optimal cohort to measure quality outcomes within a healthcare system.

METHODS

Data were collected for 5084 biliary operations performed by 68 surgeons in 11 surgical divisions in a health system including a tertiary academic hospital, two regional community hospitals, and two ambulatory surgery centers. A privacy protected dashboard was developed to compare surgeon performance and cost between July 2018 and June 2022. A sample cohort of patients ≥ 18 years who underwent cholecystectomy were compared by operative time, cost, and 30-day outcomes.

RESULTS

Over 4 years, 4568 cholecystectomy procedures were performed by 57 surgeons. Operations were done by 57 surgeons in four divisions and included 3846 (84.2%) laparoscopic cholecystectomies, 601 (13.2%) laparoscopic cholecystectomies with cholangiogram, and 121 (2.6%) open cholecystectomies. Patients were admitted from the emergency room in 2179 (47.7%) cases while 2389 (52.3%) cases were performed in the ambulatory setting. Individual surgeons were compared to peers for volume, intraoperative data, cost, and outcomes. Cost was lowest at ambulatory surgery centers, yet only 4.2% of elective procedures were performed at these facilities. Prepackaged kits with indocyanine green were more expensive than cholangiograms that used iodinated contrast. The rate of emergency department visits was lowest when cases were performed at ambulatory surgery centers.

CONCLUSION

Data generated from clinical dashboards can inform surgeons as to how they compare to peers regarding quality metrics such as cost, time, and complications. In turn, this may guide strategies to standardize care, optimize efficiency, provide cost savings, and improve outcomes for cholecystectomy procedures. Future application of clinical dashboards can assist surgeons and administrators to define value-based care.

Short-term outcomes and costs analysis of robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy-a retrospective single-center analysis

PURPOSE

Robotic-assisted surgery is an alternative technique for patients undergoing minimal invasive cholecystectomy (CHE). The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes and costs of laparoscopic versus robotic CHE, previously described as the major disadvantage of the robotic system, in a single Austrian tertiary center.

METHODS

A retrospective single-center analysis was carried out of all patients who underwent an elective minimally invasive cholecystectomy between January 2010 and August 2020 at our tertiary referral institution. Patients were divided into two groups: robotic-assisted CHE (RC) and laparoscopic CHE (LC) and compared according to demographic data, short-term postoperative outcomes and costs.

RESULTS

In the study period, 2088 elective minimal invasive cholecystectomies were performed. Of these, 220 patients met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. One hundred ten (50%) patients underwent LC, and 110 patients RC. There was no significant difference in the mean operation time between both groups (RC: 60.2 min vs LC: 62.0 min; p = 0.58). Postoperative length of stay was the same in both groups (RC: 2.65 days vs LC: 2.65 days, p = 1). Overall hospital costs were slightly higher in the robotic group with a total of €2088 for RC versus €1726 for LC.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic-assisted cholecystectomy is a safe and feasible alternative to laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Since there are no significant clinical and cost differences between the two procedures, RC is a justified operation for training the whole operation team in handling the system as a first step procedure. Prospective randomized trials are necessary to confirm these conclusions.

Robotic Surgery and Hospital Reimbursement

The field of plastic surgery remains at the forefront of technological and surgical innovation. However, the promising applications of robotics in plastic surgery must be thoughtfully balanced with hospital finances and reimbursements. Robotic systems have been studied extensively across multiple surgical disciplines and across diverse health care systems. The results show that there may be equal or better patient outcomes than alternatives. In an era where fiscal responsibility in health care is a top priority, thoughtful budgeting and spending must be considered and revisited frequently to attain sustainable organizational models that ensure appropriate use of robotic technology.

Pediatric Single-Incision Robotic Cholecystectomy: A 6-Year Update from a Single Institution

Introduction: In children, gallbladder disease has become more common due to the rise in childhood obesity and subsequent shift in etiology. While the gold standard of surgical management remains a laparoscopic technique, there has been increasing interest in robotic-assisted techniques. The aim of this study is to report a 6-year update on the experience of treating gallbladder disease with robotic-assisted surgery at a single institution. Materials and Methods: A database was created to prospectively collect patient demographic and operative variables at the time of operation from October 2015 to May 2021. Descriptive analysis of select available variables was performed using median and interquartile ranges (IQRs) for all continuous variables. Results: In total, 102 single-incision robotic cholecystectomies and one single-port subtotal cholecystectomy were performed. From available data, 82 (79.6%) patients were female, median weight was 66.25 kg (IQR: 58.09-74.24 kg), and median age was 15 years (IQR: 15-18 years). Median procedure time was 84 minutes (IQR: 70.25-103.5 minutes) and median console time was 41 minutes (IQR: 30-59.5 minutes). The most frequent preoperative diagnosis was symptomatic cholelithiasis (79.6%). One (0.97%) operation was converted from a single-incision robotic approach to open. Conclusion: Single-incision robotic cholecystectomy is a safe and reliable technique for the treatment of gallbladder disease in the adolescent population.

National analysis of cost disparities in robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic abdominal operations

BACKGROUND

Although the use of robotic-assisted surgery continues to expand, the cost-effectiveness of this platform remains unclear. The present study aimed to compare hospitalization costs and clinical outcomes between robotic-assisted surgery and laparoscopic approaches for major abdominal operations.

METHODS

All adults receiving minimally invasive gastrectomy, cholecystectomy, colectomy (right, left, transverse, sigmoid), ventral hernia repair, hysterectomy, and abdominoperineal resection were identified in the 2012 to 2019 National Inpatient Sample. Records with concurrent operations were excluded. Multivariable linear and logistic regressions were developed to examine the association of the operative approach with costs, length of stay, and complications. An interaction term between the year and operative approach was used to analyze cost differences over time.

RESULTS

Of an estimated 1,124,450 patients, 75.8% had laparoscopic surgery, and 24.2% had robotic-assisted surgery. Compared to laparoscopic, patients with robotic-assisted operations were younger and more commonly privately insured. The average hospitalization cost for laparoscopic cases was $16,000 ± 14,800 and robotic-assisted cases was $18,300 ± 13,900 (P < .001). Regardless of procedure type, all robotic-assisted operations had higher costs compared to laparoscopic operations. Risk-adjusted trend analysis revealed that the discrepancy in costs between laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgery persisted and widened over time from $1,600 in 2012 to $2,600 in 2019. Compared to laparoscopic procedures, robotic procedures had a 2.2% reduction in complications (9.4 vs 11.6%, P < .001) and a 0.7-day decrement in the length of stay (95% confidence interval -0.8 to -0.7).

CONCLUSION

Disparities in costs between robotic and laparoscopic abdominal operations have persisted over time. Given the modest decrement in adverse outcomes, further investigation into the clinical benefits of robotic surgery is warranted to justify its greater costs.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of robotic cholecystectomy in the treatment of benign gallbladder disease

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the current standard of care treatment for benign gallbladder disease. Robotic cholecystectomy is another approach for performing cholecystectomy that offers a surgeon better dexterity and visualization. However, robotic cholecystectomy may increase cost without sufficient evidence to suggest an improvement in clinical outcomes. The purpose of this study was to construct a decision tree model to compare cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and robotic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

Complication rates and effectiveness associated with robotic cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy over a 1-year time frame were compared using a decision tree model populated with data from the published literature. Cost was calculated using Medicare data. Effectiveness was represented by quality-adjusted life-years. The primary outcome of the study was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, which compares the cost per quality-adjusted life-year of the 2 interventions. The willingness-to-pay threshold was set at $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year. Results were confirmed with 1-way, 2-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses varying branch-point probabilities.

RESULTS

The studies used in our analysis included 3,498 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 1,833 patients who underwent robotic cholecystectomy, and 392 patients who required conversion to open cholecystectomy. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy produced 0.9722 quality-adjusted life-years, costing $9,370.06. Robotic cholecystectomy produced an additional 0.0017 quality-adjusted life-years at an additional $3,013.64. These results equate to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1,795,735.21/quality-adjusted life-year. This exceeds the willingness-to-pay threshold, making laparoscopic cholecystectomy the more cost-effective strategy. Sensitivity analyses did not alter results.

CONCLUSION

Traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the more cost-effective treatment modality for benign gallbladder disease. At present, robotic cholecystectomy is not able to improve clinical outcomes enough to justify its added cost.

Initial 30 cholecystectomy procedures performed with the Senhance digital laparoscopy system

PURPOSE

The Senhance digital laparoscopy system (SDLS) is a novel platform developed for digitization in endoscopic surgery. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the short-term outcome in the initial 30 consecutive patients.

METHODS

SDLS cholecystectomies were performed in 30 consecutive patients (13 male, 17 female) by a single surgeon from September 2020 to March 2022. The patients' median age (range) was 77.5 (27-82) years, and median body mass index was 23.3 (19-38) kg/m² . Four trocars were used, three of which were docked to manipulator arms of the SDLS. Surgical procedures performed with the SDLS were almost the same as those by conventional surgery.

RESULTS

Median docking time, cockpit time, and operation time in minutes were 4 (3-13), 34 (13-81), and 69 (47-201), respectively. Operation time after the sixth case tended to shorten compared with that for the initial five cases. Three cases (10%) were converted to conventional laparoscopic surgery due to severe cholecystitis, but none required conversion to open surgery. Postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥II were not observed.

CONCLUSION

This retrospective study showed that cholecystectomy using the SDLS appeared to be safe and feasible in limited cases without severe inflammation.

Robotic Cholecystectomies: What Are They Good for? - A Retrospective Study - Robotic versus Conventional Cases

INTRODUCTION

Robot-assisted cholecystectomies are often criticized as expensive with uncertain benefit to patients. Characterization of robotic surgery benefits, as well as specific factors that drive cost, has the potential to shape the current debate.

METHODS

The surgical cost and outcomes among patients who underwent robotic (n = 283) or non-robotic (n = 1438) laparoscopic cholecystectomies between 2012 and 2018 at a single academic institution were examined retrospectively. All cholecystectomies were primary surgical procedures with no secondary procedures. We also examined the subset of robotic (n = 277) and non-robotic (n = 1108) outpatient procedures.

RESULTS

Robotic cholecystectomies were associated with higher median total cost compared to conventional procedures, largely attributable to variable costs and surgical costs. Patients who underwent conventional cholecystectomy had longer mean lengths of stays (1.7 versus 1.1 days) compared to robotic procedures-with over 10 times as many requiring hospital admission.

CONCLUSIONS

At present, robotic cholecystectomies have a little value to patients and institutions outside of surgical training. Prior to narrowing the analysis to outpatient cases, difference in total cost between procedures was less pronounced due to more frequent inpatient management following conventional procedures. Future optimization of robotic consumables and free market competition among system manufacturers may increase financial feasibility by decreasing variable costs associated with robotic surgery.

Robotic cholecystectomy using Senhance robotic platform versus laparoscopic conventional cholecystectomy: a propensity score analysis

INTRODUCTION

Our study objective was to evaluate differences in intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of robotic cholecystectomy (RC) using Senhance robotic platform vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective case - matched analysis was performed for all patients who underwent cholecystectomy from November 2018 to November 2019. RC cases were matched to LC. RC was performed using Senhance robotic platform. Propensity score matching analysis with a ratio of 1:1 (RC: LC) was performed. The groups were matched according to age, sex, body mass index (BMI). All procedures were performed by two same experienced robotic surgeons at Klaipeda University Hospital (O.D. and V.E.). Age, BMI, operative time, blood loss and length of hospital stay were collected and analysed between those patient groups.

RESULTS

A total of 40 patients underwent RC or LC. There were no statistical differences between groups in concern of length of hospital stay, blood loss or complications. There were no bile duct injuries in either group, no intraoperative complications, no conversions either RC to LC or LC to open surgery. One patient in robotic group was reoperated on postoperative day 5 regarding sub-hepatic haematoma. The only statistical significance was in operative time (p < .05) which was longer in RC group. Median docking time was 12 min (range 5-23).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic cholecystectomy using Senhance robotic platform appears to be safe in comparison with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy might be feasible in gaining robotic surgery skills.

Robotic cholecystectomy with a new port placement-is it really beneficial?

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the effect of robotic cholecystectomy (RC) with a new port placement versus that of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) on surgical pain and postoperative complications.

METHODS

We prospectively collected medical data from 100 patients who underwent cholecystectomy (RC = 50, LC = 50) from March 2017 to January 2019. In the RC group, ports were positioned in the left-lower, mid-lower, and umbilical areas. In the LC group, ports were placed in the xiphoid, right-upper, and umbilical areas.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics were similar between the two groups. Pain levels at 2, 4, and 8 h were significantly lower in the RC group than in the LC group (p = 0.04, 0.02, and 0.02, respectively). The LC group received more analgesics after surgery (RC = 0.3 ± 0.5 vs. LC = 0.7 ± 0.9, p = 0.03). However, the total medical cost was significantly higher in the RC group (RC = 7355.2 ± 1270.9 USD vs. LC = 4814.8 ± 1572.5 USD, p < 0.01). Mean operative time, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications were not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Regardless of the surgical procedure, postoperative complications were similar. RC with the new port placement can be recommended for patients who are more concerned about postoperative pain, incision, and hospital stay than surgical cost.

Robotic Resection of Gallbladder Cancer: A Single-Center Retrospective Comparative Study to Open Resection

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery is gaining support for resection of gallbladder cancer (GBC). This study aims to compare operative and early outcomes of robotic resection (RR) to open resection (OR) from a single institution performing a high volume of robotic HPB surgery.

METHODS

Twenty patients with GBC underwent RR from January 2013 to August 2019. Outcomes were compared to a historical control of 23 patients with OR. Radical cholecystectomy for suspected GBC and completion operations for incidental GBC after routine cholecystectomy were both included.

RESULTS

Robotic resection had lower blood loss compared to OR (150 vs 350 mL, P = .002) and shorter postoperative length of stay (2.5 vs 6 days, P < .001), while median operative time was similar (193 vs 208 min, P = .604). There were no statistical differences in 30-day major complications or readmissions. No 30-day mortalities occurred. There was no statistical difference in survival trend (P = .438) or median lymph node harvest (5 vs 3, P = .189) for RR compared to OR.

CONCLUSION

Robotic resection of GBC is safe and efficient, with lower length of hospital stay and blood loss compared to OR. Technical benefits of robotic-assisted surgery may prove advantageous though larger studies are still needed.

Comparative analysis of robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy in pediatric patients

BACKGROUND

Despite increased utilization of robotic-assisted surgery in the pediatric population during the past decade, reports of comparative analysis between robotic surgery and laparoscopic surgery are lacking. Our aim was to evaluate outcomes between pediatric robotic-assisted cholecystectomy (RC) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

METHODS

A single institution retrospective analysis of 299 patients undergoing either RC or LC, between January 2015 and December 2018 was performed. Demographic data as well as clinical characteristics and related outcomes were abstracted and compared using univariate analysis. Related hospital costs were estimated using a charge to cost methodology.

RESULTS

The median age of the cohort was 15.5 years (IQR 14.0-17.0); 76% females and 70% white, with 74% (n = 220) undergoing LC and 26% (n = 79) undergoing RC. The majority of RC were performed using single-site technique and RC proportion increased with time (10% in 2015 vs. 41% in 2018, p<0.001). The majority of RC were more commonly attributed to patients with nonacute indications for cholecystectomy compared to acute clinical indications (87% vs. 13%). Median operative time was 98 min vs. 79 min for RC and LC respectively (p<0.001). Median postoperative LOS was similar between groups (22 h). There were no significant differences in postoperative complication, in-hospital opioid utilization and 30-day readmissions. Average total hospital costs for RC were $15,519 compared to $11,197 for LC.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric robotic-assisted cholecystectomy is feasible with similar outcomes compared to laparoscopic cholecystectomy. However, it is associated with longer operative times and higher costs. The single-site RC technique may provide a potential cosmetic benefit.

Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of robot-assisted cholecystectomy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Rapid adoption of robotic-assisted general surgery procedures, particularly for cholecystectomy, continues while questions remain about its benefits and utility. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness of robot-assisted cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease as compared with the laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

A literature search was performed from January 2010 to March 2020, and a narrative analysis was performed as studies were heterogeneous.

RESULTS

Of 887 articles screened, 44 met the inclusion criteria (range 20-735,537 patients). Four were randomized controlled trials, and four used propensity-matching. There were variable comparisons between operative techniques with only 19 out of 44 studies comparing techniques using the same number of ports. Operating room time was longer for the robot-assisted technique in the majority of studies (range 11-55 min for 22 studies, p < 0.05; 15 studies showed no difference; two studies showed shorter laparoscopic times), while conversion rates and intraoperative complications were not different. No differences were detected for the length of stay, surgical site infection, or readmissions. Across studies comparing single-port robot-assisted to multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy, there was a higher rate of incisional hernia; however, no differences were noted when comparing single-port robot-assisted to single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical outcomes were similar for benign, elective gallbladder disease for robot-assisted compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Overall, the rates of complications were low. More high-quality studies are needed as the robot-assisted technique expands to more complex gallbladder disease, where its utility may prove increasingly beneficial.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020156945.

Does near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography with indocyanine green reduce bile duct injuries and conversions to open surgery during laparoscopic or robotic cholecystectomy? - A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Bile duct injury and conversion-to-open-surgery rates remain unacceptably high during laparoscopic and robotic cholecystectomy. In a recently published randomized clinical trial, using near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography with indocyanine green intraoperatively markedly enhanced biliary-structure visualization. Our systematic literature review compares bile duct injury and conversion-to-open-surgery rates in patients undergoing laparoscopic or robotic cholecystectomy with versus without near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography.

METHODS

A thorough PubMed search was conducted to identify randomized clinical trials and nonrandomized clinical trials with ≥100 patients. Because all near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography studies were published since 2013, only studies without near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography published since 2013 were included for comparison. Incidence estimates, weighted and unweighted for study size, were adjusted for acute versus chronic cholecystitis, and for robotic versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy and are reported as events/10,000 patients. All studies were assessed for bias risk and high-risk studies excluded.

RESULTS

In total, 4,990 abstracts were reviewed, identifying 5 near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography studies (3 laparoscopic cholecystectomy/2 robotic cholecystectomy; n = 1,603) and 11 not near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography studies (5 laparoscopic cholecystectomy/4 robotic cholecystectomy/2 both; n = 5,070) for analysis. Overall weighted rates for bile duct injury and conversion were 6 and 16/10,000 in near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography patients versus 25 and 271/10,000 in patients without near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography. Among patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, bile duct injuries, and conversion rates among near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography versus patients without near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography were 0 and 23/10,000 versus 32 and 255/10,000, respectively. Bile duct injury rates were low with robotic cholecystectomy with and without near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography (12 and 8/10,000), but there was a marked reduction in conversions with near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography (12 vs 322/10,000).

CONCLUSION

Although large comparative trials remain necessary, preliminary analysis suggests that using near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography with indocyanine green intraoperatively sizably decreases bile duct injury and conversion-to-open-surgery rates relative to cholecystectomy under white light alone.

Outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease in Veteran patients

The robotic platform for cholecystectomy has been extensively studied in comparison to its laparoscopic counterpart with acceptable outcomes. However, wide acceptance of a robotic approach to cholecystectomy has been limited by increased operative room (OR) times and substantially higher cost. This is a single-institution retrospective review of Veteran patients presenting for elective laparoscopic (LC) and robotic (RC) cholecystectomies for benign biliary disease at the Dallas VA Medical Center. The primary goal was to interrogate 30-day morbidity as well as operative room times, estimated blood loss (EBL), hospital length of stay (LOS), and conversion rates. The entire cohort included 612 patients (age = 55.1 ± 12.9 years, men = 77.9%, BMI = 31.2 ± 6.3 kg/m²) undergoing elective cholecystectomy (LC = 441 and RC = 171) for benign biliary disease (biliary colic = 78.8%, history of biliary pancreatitis = 7.8%, history of cholecystitis = 5.7%). Univariate analysis comparing LC and RC showed the two groups to be of similar age (55.4 ± 12.4 vs. 54.4 ± 14.2 years; p = 0.4), male gender (79.4% vs. 74.3%, p = 0.2), and BMI (31.1 ± 6.4 vs. 31.5 ± 6.3 kg/m²; p = 0.5). Except for dyslipidemia (LC = 48.3% vs. RC = 36.8%; p = 0.01), both groups had the same rate of co-morbid conditions. ASA level III and IV (LC = 60.1 vs. RC = 69.0%, p = 0.04) was higher in the RC group. Both groups underwent surgical intervention for similar indications (biliary colic LC = 80.5% vs. RC = 74.3; p = 0.1). Hospital LOS (1.7 ± 3.2 vs. 0.3 ± 0.9 days, p < 0.001), EBL (32.3 ± 52.3 vs. 17.0 ± 43.1; p = 0.001), and conversion to open (6.6% vs. 0.6%, p = 0.001) were all superior with the robotic platform. Thirty-day overall morbidity (9.8% vs. 12.3%, p = 0.4), skin-to-skin OR time (84.5 ± 33.5 vs. 88.0 ± 35.3 min, p = 0.2), and total OR time (129.2 ± 36.8 vs. 129.7 ± 39.7, p = 0.9) were similar between the LC and RC groups. Despite being older and having more comorbidities, Veteran patients undergoing robotic cholecystectomy experienced equivalent OR time and a moderate improvement in conversion rate, EBL, and hospital LOS compared to those undergoing conventional laparoscopy, therein demonstrating the safety and efficacy of the robotic platform for this patient population.

A 3-Year MBSAQIP propensity-matched analysis of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with concomitant cholecystectomy: Is the robotic or laparoscopic approach preferred?

BACKGROUND

The primary objective of this study was to compare outcomes of patients undergoing minimally invasive RYGB (MIS/RYGB) versus MIS/RYGB with concomitant Cholecystectomy (CCY). A secondary objective was to compare the outcomes for laparoscopic RYGB (LRYGB) and robotic RYGB (RRYGB) with concomitant CCY.

METHODS

Outcomes of 117,939 MIS/RYGB with and without CCY were propensity-matched (Age, Gender, BMI, Comorbidities), 10:1, using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database from 2015-2017. The MIS/RYGB with CCY were then separated into LRYGB and RRYGB cases for comparison. Exclusion criteria included emergency cases, conversions to open, and age less than 18.

RESULTS

The operative time and length of stay (LOS) was significantly increased with addition of concomitant CCY. There was no significant difference in readmission, reoperation, intervention, morbidity, or mortality. The RRYGB with CCY approach was associated with a significantly longer operative times compared to the LRYGB with CCY (177 vs. 135 min, p < 0.0001). The laparoscopic and robotic groups demonstrated no significant difference LOS, readmission, reoperation, intervention, morbidity, or mortality rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates that concomitant cholecystectomy increased the operative time and length of stay. However, concomitant CCY was not associated with any increased morbidity. The study demonstrated no significant difference in morbidity between robotic and laparoscopic approach. The robotic approach, however, was associated with a significantly longer operative time compared to the laparoscopic approach. While the indications for CCY remain controversial, concomitant CCY does not convey additional risk regardless of operative approach.

Evaluating readmissions following laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the state of New York

INTRODUCTION

Hospital readmissions constitute an important component of associated costs of a disease and can contribute a significant burden to healthcare. The majority of studies evaluating readmissions following laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) comprise of single center studies and thus can underestimate the actual incidence of readmission. We sought to examine the rate and causes of readmissions following LC using a large longitudinal database.

METHODS

The New York SPARCS database was used to identify all adult patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign biliary disease between 2000 and 2016. Due to the presence of a unique identifier, patients with readmission to any New York hospital were evaluated. Planned versus unplanned readmission rates were compared. Following univariate analysis, multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify risk factors for unplanned readmissions after accounting for baseline characteristics, comorbidities and complications.

RESULTS

There were 591,627 patients who underwent LC during the studied time period. Overall 30-day readmission rate was 4.94% (n = 29,245) and unplanned 30-days readmission rate was 4.58% (n = 27,084). Female patients were less likely to have 30-day unplanned readmissions. Patients with age older than 65 or younger than 29 were more likely to have 30-day unplanned readmissions compared to patients with age 30-44 or 45-64. Insurance status was also significant, as patients with Medicaid/Medicare were more likely to have unplanned readmissions compared to commercial insurance. In addition, variables such as Black race, presence of any comorbidity, postoperative complication, and prolonged initial hospital length of stay were associated with subsequent readmission.

CONCLUSION

This data show that readmissions rates following LC are relatively low; however, majority of readmissions are unplanned. Most common reason for unplanned readmissions was associated with complications of the procedure or medical care. By identifying certain risk groups, unplanned readmissions may be prevented.

A Potential Role for Robotic Cholecystectomy in Patients with Advanced Liver Disease: Analysis of the NSQIP Database

Robotic surgery has been widely adopted by many specialties, including hepatobiliary surgery. However, robotic procedures generally require longer operative times and are costlier than their laparoscopic counterparts. The role for robotic cholecystectomy (RC), particularly in patients with advanced liver disease, has not been established. A retrospective analysis of the NSQIP database was performed, focusing on patients with chronic liver disease who underwent cholecystectomy. Patients were categorized based on their model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score and the type of surgical procedure: open, laparoscopic, or RC. Rates of a variety of postoperative complications including length of stay (LOS) were analyzed. In patients with a MELD score of 21 to 30, open cholecystectomy was associated with a long hospital LOS (3 vs 1 vs 1; P 20.01). RC was equivalent to laparoscopic cholecystectomy in terms of perioperative mortality for higher MELD score patients but was associated with lower conversion rates and overall LOS. This data suggests that RC should be considered in patients with advanced liver disease needing cholecystectomy.

Robotic Biliary Surgery

Robotic cholecystectomy is safe and feasible approach and can be combined with common bile duct exploration to address complicated pathology in a single setting. This article summarizes reported outcomes after robotic biliary surgery. A technical overview of robotic multiport and single port cholecystectomy is provided. Last, the approach to benign bile duct disease during robotic cholecystectomy, including reconstruction of the biliary tree, is described.

Robotic compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A propensity matched analysis

BACKGROUND

As robotic surgery becomes more ubiquitous, determining clinical benefit is necessary to justify the cost and time investment required to become proficient. We hypothesized that robotic cholecystectomy would be associated with improved clinical outcomes but also increased cost as compared with standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients undergoing robotic or laparoscopic cholecystectomy at a single academic hospital between 2007 and 2017 were identified using an institutional clinical data repository. Patients were stratified by operative approach (robotic versus laparoscopic) for comparison and propensity score matched 1:10 based on relevant comorbidities and demographics. Categorical variables were analyzed by the χ² test and continuous variables using the Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

A total of 3,255 patients underwent cholecystectomy during the study period. We observed no differences in demographics or body mass index, but greater rates of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and gastroesophageal reflux disease were present in the laparoscopic group. After matching (n = 106 robotic, n = 1,060 laparoscopic), there were no differences in preoperative comorbidities. Patients who underwent robotic cholecystectomy had lesser durations of stay (robotic: 0.1 ± 0.7 versus laparoscopic: 0.8 ± 1.9, P < .0001) and lesser 90-day readmission rates (robotic: 0% [0], laparoscopic: 4.1% [43], P = 0.035); however, both operative and hospital costs were greater compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

CONCLUSION

Robotic cholecystectomy is associated with lesser duration of stay and lesser readmission rate within 90 days of the index operation, but also greater operative duration and hospital cost compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Hospitals and surgeons need to consider the improved clinical outcomes but also the monetary and time investment required before pursuing robotic cholecystectomy.

Robotic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: Three case reports

INTRODUCTION

Nowadays laparoscopic cholecystectomy is considered as criterion standard for surgical treatment of acute calculous cholecystitis. During the last few years, there has been growing interest about the robotic approach. Several authors have reported the superiority of robotic cholecystectomy, associated with a lower percentage of conversion especially in patients with intraoperative diagnosis of acute or gangrenous cholecystitis. We report 3 case reports of moderate acute cholecystitis successfully treated by robotic cholecystectomy.

PATIENT CONCERNS

Three patients presented moderate acute calculous cholecystitis with leukocytosis, fever, nausea, vomiting, and pain.

DIAGNOSIS

Three patients of our study population had clinical and laboratory suspicion of moderate acute calculous cholecystitis verified by abdominal ultrasound examination, which found out cholelitiasis in all 3 cases. Final diagnosis was confirmed by intraoperative findings and histopathological examination, with two empyematous cholecystitis and one perforated cholecystitis.

INTERVENTIONS

All patients underwent robotic cholecystectomy with the da Vinci Robotic Surgical System. The entire procedure required a mean operation time of 128 minutes and the average blood loss was 60 mL, without any intraoperative complications.

OUTCOMES

In all 3 cases postoperative period was uneventfull. All the patients were discharged within 24 hours and no readmissions were reported during a 30 days' follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic cholecystectomy for ACC is feasible and safe. Several studies have demonstrated that robotic approach reduces the risk of conversion to open surgery in case of acute or gangrenous cholecystitis. Our results are in line with current literature. In fact, we have successfully treated 2 patients with empyematous acute cholecystitis and 1 with gangrenous cholecystitis with a totally robotic approach, without any complications or need of conversion to open surgery. In conclusion, our results confirm that it is the time to include robotic surgery in the emergency setting.

An Update on Technical Aspects of Cholecystectomy

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has revolutionized the field of surgery, and is currently the gold standard in the treatment for symptomatic cholelithiasis. The goal of every laparoscopic cholecystectomy should be attainment of the critical view of safety before cutting the cystic duct and artery to reduce the risk of bile duct injury. Open cholecystectomy is most commonly performed when laparoscopic cholecystectomy is converted to open or when laparoscopic cholecystectomy is contraindicated. Robotic cholecystectomy is a safe alternative to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and follows the same basic operative principles.

Cost Analysis and Supply Utilization of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is one of the highest volume surgeries performed annually. We hypothesized that there is a statistically significant intradepartmental cost variance with supply utilization variability amongst surgeons of different subspecialty. This study sought to describe laparoscopic cholecystectomy cost of care among three subspecialties of surgeons. This retrospective observational cohort study captured 372 laparoscopic cholecystectomy cases performed between June 2015 and June 2016 by 12 surgeons divided into three subspecialties: 2 in bariatric surgery (BS), 5 in acute care surgery (ACS), and 5 in general surgery (GS). The study utilized a third-party software, Surgical Profitability Compass Procedure Cost Manager and Crimson System (SPCMCS) (The Advisory Board Company, Washington, DC), to stratify case volume, supply cost, case duration, case severity level, and patient length of stay intradepartmentally. Statistical methods included the Kruskal-Wallis test. Average composite supply cost per case was $569 and median supply cost per case was $554. The case volume was 133 (BS), 109 (ACS), and 130 (GS). The median intradepartmental total supply cost was $674.5 (BS), $534 (ACS), and $564 (GS) (P<0.005). ACS and GS presented with a higher standard deviation of cost, $98 (ACS) and $110 (GS) versus $26 (BS). The median case duration was 70 min (BS), 107 min (ACS), and 78 min (GS) (P<0.02). The average patient length of stay was 1.15 (BS), 3.10 (ACS), and 1.17 (GS) (P<0.005). Overall, there was a statistically significant difference in median supply cost (highest in BS; lowest in ACS and GS). However, the higher supply costs may be attenuated by decreased operative time and patient length of stay. Strategies to reduce total supply cost per case include mandating exchange of expensive items, standardization of supply sets, increased price transparency, and education to surgeons.

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery, an emerging technology, has some potential advantages in many complicated endoscopic procedures compared with laparoscopic surgery. But robot-assisted cholecystectomy (RAC) is still a controversial issue on its comparative merit compared with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of RAC compared with LC for benign gallbladder disease.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases (from their inception to December 2017) to obtain comparative studies assessing the safety and efficacy between RAC and LC. The quality of the literature was assessed, and the data analyzed using R software, random effects models were applied.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies, including 5 RCTs and 21 NRCSs (3 prospective plus 18 retrospective), were included. A total of 4004 patients were included, of which 1833 patients (46%) underwent RAC and 2171 patients (54%) underwent LC. No significant differences were found in intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, readmission rate, hospital stay, estimated blood loss, and conversion rate between RAC and LC groups. However, RAC was related to longer operative time compared with LC (MD = 12.04 min, 95% CI 7.26-16.82) in RCT group, which was consistent with NRCS group; RAC also had a higher rate of incisional hernia in NRCS group (RR = 3.06, 95% CI 1.42-6.57), and one RCT reported that RAC was similar to LC (RR = 7.00, 95% CI 0.38-129.84).

CONCLUSIONS

The RAC was not found to be more effective or safer than LC for benign gallbladder diseases, which indicated that RAC is a developing procedure instead of replacing LC at once. Given the higher costs, the current evidence is in favor of LC in cholecystectomy.

Minimally Invasive Pediatric Cholecystectomy: A Comparison of Robotic and Laparoscopic Single and Multiport Techniques

BACKGROUND

Pediatric laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the current standard of care for gallbladder pathology. Single-incision and multiport procedures, as well as robotic and minimally invasive platforms, have been described; however, there is no head-to-head assessment of these interventions in the existing literature. The purpose of our study was to directly compare the minimally invasive cholecystectomy techniques of laparoscopic multiport (LMP), laparoscopic single incision (LSI), robotic multiport (RMP), and robotic single incision (RSI).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All cholecystectomies performed by a single surgeon at a tertiary-care center from 2010 to 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Seventy-one subjects were included as follows: 30 LMP, 20 LSI, 11 RMP, and 10 RSI. Data were collected on patient characteristics, operative technique, operative times, medications, and postoperative course and analyzed using a Kruskal-Wallis test with a significance of P < .05.

RESULTS

Operative times for LMP and RSI were similar and shortest of all groups, while LSI was the most time consuming (P = .04). Pain medication use, both narcotic and non-narcotic, was not statistically different with any operation type (P = .37 and .98, respectively). Postoperative length of stay was similar across all groups except for the RSI group which was significantly shorter (P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

RSI cholecystectomy has significantly shorter postoperative length of stay compared to other minimally invasive techniques. In addition, operative times for RSI are equivalent to the current standard LMP technique.

The emerging role for robotics in cholecystectomy: the dawn of a new era?

Though laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) was highly criticized in its early stages, it quickly grew to become a new standard of care and has revolutionized the field of general surgery. Now emerging robotic technology is making its way into the minimally invasive arena. Robotic cholecystectomy (RC) is often disparaged as a costly technology that can lead to increased operative times with outcomes that are quite similar to LC. However, this perspective is skewed as many existing studies were performed in the early phase of learning for this procedure. RC can be performed in a cost-effective manner as the volume of robotic procedures increases. In addition, improved visualization and capability to perform fluorescence cholangiography can improve the safety profile of cholecystectomy to a level that has not yet been achieved with conventional laparoscopy. Advanced simulation technology for robotic surgery, and newer single-site robotic platforms have the potential to further revolutionize this technology and lead to improved patient satisfaction. In this review, we will present current data, trends, and controversies in robotic-assisted cholecystectomy.

Targeting Value-Driven Quality Improvement for Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in Michigan

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate complete episode expenditures for laparoscopic cholecystectomy, a common and lower-risk operation, to characterize novel targets for value-based quality improvement.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Despite enthusiasm for improving the overall value of surgical care, most efforts have focused on high-risk inpatient surgery.

METHODS

We identified 19,213 patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy from 2012 to 2015 using data from Medicare and a large private payer. We calculated price-standardized payments for the entire surgical episode of care and stratified patients by surgeon. We used linear regression to risk- and reliability-adjusted expenditures for patient characteristics, diagnoses, and the use of additional procedures.

RESULTS

Fully adjusted total episode costs varied 2.4-fold across surgeons ($7922-$17,500). After grouping surgeons by adjusted total episode payments, each component of the total episode was more expensive for patients treated by the most expensive versus the least expensive quartile of surgeons. For example, payments for physician services were higher for the most expensive surgeons [$1932, 95% confidence interval (CI) $1844-$2021] compared to least expensive surgeons ($1592, 95% CI $1450-$1701, P < 0.01). Overall differences were driven by higher rates of complications (10% vs. 5%) and readmissions (14% vs. 8%), and lower rates of ambulatory procedures (77% vs. 56%) for surgeons with the highest versus lowest expenditures. Projections showed that a 10% increase ambulatory operations would yield $3.6 million in annual savings for beneficiaries.

CONCLUSIONS

Episode payments for laparoscopic cholecystectomy vary widely across surgeons. Although improvements in several domains would reduce expenditures, efforts to expand ambulatory surgical practices may result in the largest savings to beneficiaries in Michigan.