Cost-Effectiveness of Robotic vs. Laparoscopic Surgery for Different Surgical Procedures: Protocol for a Prospective, Multicentric Study (ROBOCOSTES)

Surgical Frontiers: A Comparative Review of Robotics Versus Laparoscopy in Gynecological Interventions

This review comprehensively examines the current state and future directions of gynecological surgery, focusing on the comparative analysis of laparoscopy and robotic surgery. The overview highlights the evolution of these surgical techniques, emphasizing their impact on patient outcomes, procedural efficiency, and safety profiles. The analysis encompasses critical factors such as cost-effectiveness, learning curves, and implications for postoperative recovery. The future of gynecological surgery is envisioned through emerging technologies, including augmented reality, single-incision laparoscopy, and artificial intelligence. The coexistence of laparoscopy and robotics is explored, acknowledging their respective strengths and roles in shaping women's healthcare. In conclusion, the dynamic nature of the field is underscored, emphasizing the need for a patient-centered and adaptable approach. Collaboration between healthcare professionals, engineers, and researchers is pivotal in unlocking these innovations' full potential, ensuring continued advancements in gynecological surgery for improved outcomes and enhanced patient care.

A cost analysis of robotic vs. video-assisted thoracic surgery: The impact of the learning curve and the COVID-19 pandemic

Introduction

Robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) is an alternative to video-assessed thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for the treatment of lung cancer but concern exists regarding the high associated costs. The COVID-19 pandemic added further financial pressure to healthcare systems. This study investigated the impact of the learning curve on the cost-effectiveness of RATS lung resection and the financial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on a RATS program.

Methods

Patients undergoing RATS lung resection between January 2017 and December 2020 were prospectively followed. A matched cohort of VATS cases were analyzed in parallel. The first 100 and most recent 100 RATS cases performed at our institution were compared to assess the learning curve. Cases performed before and after March 2020 were compared to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. A comprehensive cost analysis of multiple theatre and postoperative data points was performed using Stata statistics package (v14.2).

Results

365 RATS cases were included. Median cost per procedure was £7,167 and theatre cost accounted for 70%. Major contributing factors to overall cost were operative time and postoperative length of stay. Cost per case was £640 less after passing the learning curve (p < 0.001) largely due to reduced operative time. Comparison of a post-learning curve RATS subgroup matched to 101 VATS cases revealed no significant difference in theatre costs between the two techniques. Overall cost of RATS lung resections performed before and during the COVID-19 pandemic were not significantly different. However, theatre costs were significantly cheaper (£620/case; p < 0.001) and postoperative costs were significantly more expensive (£1,221/case; p = 0.018) during the pandemic.

Discussion

Passing the learning curve is associated with a significant reduction in the theatre costs associated with RATS lung resection and is comparable with the cost of VATS. This study may underestimate the true cost benefit of passing the learning curve due to the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on theatre costs. The COVID-19 pandemic made RATS lung resection more expensive due to prolonged hospital stay and increased readmission rate. The present study offers some evidence that the initial increased costs associated with RATS lung resection may be gradually offset as a program progresses.