How does robotic anti-reflux surgery compare with traditional open and laparoscopic techniques: A cost and outcomes analysis

Benjamin Owen, Anton Simorov, Andy Siref, Valerie Shostrom, Dmitry Oleynikov

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Conventional laparoscopic fundoplications (CLF) have been the gold standard for Nissen fundoplications (NFs) for two decades. The advent of a robotic approach for fundoplication procedures creates a potential alternative. Thus, we used a national database to examine perioperative outcomes with respect to open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches. Methods: The University Health System Consortium is an alliance of medical centers, numbering over 115 academic institutions and their 271 affiliated hospitals. We used International Classification of Diseases codes to elicit patients over the age of 18 years who received NF procedures. Results: A total of 12,079 patients of similar demographic background received fundoplication procedures from October 2008 to June 2012. Of those, 2,168 were open fundoplications (OF), 9,572 were CLF, and 339 were robot-assisted laparoscopic fundoplications (RLF). CLF and RLF displayed no significance in mortality (0.1 vs. 0 %; p = 0.5489), morbidity (4.0 vs. 5.6 %; p = 0.1744), length of stay (2.8 ± 3.6 vs. 3.0 ± 3.5; p = 0.3242), and intensive care unit (ICU) cases (8.4 vs. 11.5 %; p = 0.051). However, CLF remained superior, with a lower 30-day re-admission rate (1.8 vs. 3.6 %; p < 0.05) and cost (US$7,968 ± 6,969 vs. US$10,644 ± 6,041; p < 0.05). When RLF was compared with OF, RLF had significantly improved morbidity (5.6 vs. 11 %; p < 0.05), length of stay (6.1 ± 7.2 vs. 3.0 ± 3.5 days; p < 0.05), less ICU admission (11.5 vs. 23.1 %; p <0.05) and less cost (US$10,644 ± 6,041 vs. US$12,766 ± 13,982; p < 0.05). Conclusions: Current data suggests that robot-assisted NF procedures have similar patient outcomes to conventional laparoscopic NF, with the exception of added cost and higher re-admission rate. While the higher costs are expected given the new technology, increasing re-admission rates are concerning and may represent the level of experience of the surgeon as well as the robotic learning curve.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1686-1690
Number of pages5
JournalSurgical endoscopy
Volume28
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2014

Fingerprint

Fundoplication
Robotics
Costs and Cost Analysis
Intensive Care Units
Length of Stay
Morbidity
Learning Curve
International Classification of Diseases

Keywords

  • Digestive
  • GORD/GERD
  • Oesophageal

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

How does robotic anti-reflux surgery compare with traditional open and laparoscopic techniques : A cost and outcomes analysis. / Owen, Benjamin; Simorov, Anton; Siref, Andy; Shostrom, Valerie; Oleynikov, Dmitry.

In: Surgical endoscopy, Vol. 28, No. 5, 05.2014, p. 1686-1690.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Owen, Benjamin ; Simorov, Anton ; Siref, Andy ; Shostrom, Valerie ; Oleynikov, Dmitry. / How does robotic anti-reflux surgery compare with traditional open and laparoscopic techniques : A cost and outcomes analysis. In: Surgical endoscopy. 2014 ; Vol. 28, No. 5. pp. 1686-1690.
@article{e3aadd8a2fdf4899baaa2d4082ccfc61,
title = "How does robotic anti-reflux surgery compare with traditional open and laparoscopic techniques: A cost and outcomes analysis",
abstract = "Background: Conventional laparoscopic fundoplications (CLF) have been the gold standard for Nissen fundoplications (NFs) for two decades. The advent of a robotic approach for fundoplication procedures creates a potential alternative. Thus, we used a national database to examine perioperative outcomes with respect to open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches. Methods: The University Health System Consortium is an alliance of medical centers, numbering over 115 academic institutions and their 271 affiliated hospitals. We used International Classification of Diseases codes to elicit patients over the age of 18 years who received NF procedures. Results: A total of 12,079 patients of similar demographic background received fundoplication procedures from October 2008 to June 2012. Of those, 2,168 were open fundoplications (OF), 9,572 were CLF, and 339 were robot-assisted laparoscopic fundoplications (RLF). CLF and RLF displayed no significance in mortality (0.1 vs. 0 {\%}; p = 0.5489), morbidity (4.0 vs. 5.6 {\%}; p = 0.1744), length of stay (2.8 ± 3.6 vs. 3.0 ± 3.5; p = 0.3242), and intensive care unit (ICU) cases (8.4 vs. 11.5 {\%}; p = 0.051). However, CLF remained superior, with a lower 30-day re-admission rate (1.8 vs. 3.6 {\%}; p < 0.05) and cost (US$7,968 ± 6,969 vs. US$10,644 ± 6,041; p < 0.05). When RLF was compared with OF, RLF had significantly improved morbidity (5.6 vs. 11 {\%}; p < 0.05), length of stay (6.1 ± 7.2 vs. 3.0 ± 3.5 days; p < 0.05), less ICU admission (11.5 vs. 23.1 {\%}; p <0.05) and less cost (US$10,644 ± 6,041 vs. US$12,766 ± 13,982; p < 0.05). Conclusions: Current data suggests that robot-assisted NF procedures have similar patient outcomes to conventional laparoscopic NF, with the exception of added cost and higher re-admission rate. While the higher costs are expected given the new technology, increasing re-admission rates are concerning and may represent the level of experience of the surgeon as well as the robotic learning curve.",
keywords = "Digestive, GORD/GERD, Oesophageal",
author = "Benjamin Owen and Anton Simorov and Andy Siref and Valerie Shostrom and Dmitry Oleynikov",
year = "2014",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1007/s00464-013-3372-y",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "28",
pages = "1686--1690",
journal = "Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques",
issn = "0930-2794",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How does robotic anti-reflux surgery compare with traditional open and laparoscopic techniques

T2 - A cost and outcomes analysis

AU - Owen, Benjamin

AU - Simorov, Anton

AU - Siref, Andy

AU - Shostrom, Valerie

AU - Oleynikov, Dmitry

PY - 2014/5

Y1 - 2014/5

N2 - Background: Conventional laparoscopic fundoplications (CLF) have been the gold standard for Nissen fundoplications (NFs) for two decades. The advent of a robotic approach for fundoplication procedures creates a potential alternative. Thus, we used a national database to examine perioperative outcomes with respect to open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches. Methods: The University Health System Consortium is an alliance of medical centers, numbering over 115 academic institutions and their 271 affiliated hospitals. We used International Classification of Diseases codes to elicit patients over the age of 18 years who received NF procedures. Results: A total of 12,079 patients of similar demographic background received fundoplication procedures from October 2008 to June 2012. Of those, 2,168 were open fundoplications (OF), 9,572 were CLF, and 339 were robot-assisted laparoscopic fundoplications (RLF). CLF and RLF displayed no significance in mortality (0.1 vs. 0 %; p = 0.5489), morbidity (4.0 vs. 5.6 %; p = 0.1744), length of stay (2.8 ± 3.6 vs. 3.0 ± 3.5; p = 0.3242), and intensive care unit (ICU) cases (8.4 vs. 11.5 %; p = 0.051). However, CLF remained superior, with a lower 30-day re-admission rate (1.8 vs. 3.6 %; p < 0.05) and cost (US$7,968 ± 6,969 vs. US$10,644 ± 6,041; p < 0.05). When RLF was compared with OF, RLF had significantly improved morbidity (5.6 vs. 11 %; p < 0.05), length of stay (6.1 ± 7.2 vs. 3.0 ± 3.5 days; p < 0.05), less ICU admission (11.5 vs. 23.1 %; p <0.05) and less cost (US$10,644 ± 6,041 vs. US$12,766 ± 13,982; p < 0.05). Conclusions: Current data suggests that robot-assisted NF procedures have similar patient outcomes to conventional laparoscopic NF, with the exception of added cost and higher re-admission rate. While the higher costs are expected given the new technology, increasing re-admission rates are concerning and may represent the level of experience of the surgeon as well as the robotic learning curve.

AB - Background: Conventional laparoscopic fundoplications (CLF) have been the gold standard for Nissen fundoplications (NFs) for two decades. The advent of a robotic approach for fundoplication procedures creates a potential alternative. Thus, we used a national database to examine perioperative outcomes with respect to open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches. Methods: The University Health System Consortium is an alliance of medical centers, numbering over 115 academic institutions and their 271 affiliated hospitals. We used International Classification of Diseases codes to elicit patients over the age of 18 years who received NF procedures. Results: A total of 12,079 patients of similar demographic background received fundoplication procedures from October 2008 to June 2012. Of those, 2,168 were open fundoplications (OF), 9,572 were CLF, and 339 were robot-assisted laparoscopic fundoplications (RLF). CLF and RLF displayed no significance in mortality (0.1 vs. 0 %; p = 0.5489), morbidity (4.0 vs. 5.6 %; p = 0.1744), length of stay (2.8 ± 3.6 vs. 3.0 ± 3.5; p = 0.3242), and intensive care unit (ICU) cases (8.4 vs. 11.5 %; p = 0.051). However, CLF remained superior, with a lower 30-day re-admission rate (1.8 vs. 3.6 %; p < 0.05) and cost (US$7,968 ± 6,969 vs. US$10,644 ± 6,041; p < 0.05). When RLF was compared with OF, RLF had significantly improved morbidity (5.6 vs. 11 %; p < 0.05), length of stay (6.1 ± 7.2 vs. 3.0 ± 3.5 days; p < 0.05), less ICU admission (11.5 vs. 23.1 %; p <0.05) and less cost (US$10,644 ± 6,041 vs. US$12,766 ± 13,982; p < 0.05). Conclusions: Current data suggests that robot-assisted NF procedures have similar patient outcomes to conventional laparoscopic NF, with the exception of added cost and higher re-admission rate. While the higher costs are expected given the new technology, increasing re-admission rates are concerning and may represent the level of experience of the surgeon as well as the robotic learning curve.

KW - Digestive

KW - GORD/GERD

KW - Oesophageal

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84900011353&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84900011353&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00464-013-3372-y

DO - 10.1007/s00464-013-3372-y

M3 - Article

C2 - 24414455

AN - SCOPUS:84900011353

VL - 28

SP - 1686

EP - 1690

JO - Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques

JF - Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques

SN - 0930-2794

IS - 5

ER -