The cost of robotics: an analysis of the added costs of robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery using the National Inpatient Sample.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) with its advantages continues to gain popularity among surgeons. This study analyzed the increased costs of RAS in common surgical procedures using the National Inpatient Sample. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of the 2012-2014 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project-NIS was performed for the following laparoscopic/robotic procedures: cholecystectomy, ventral hernia repair, right and left hemicolectomy, sigmoidectomy, abdominoperineal resection, and total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH). Patients with additional concurrent procedures were excluded. Costs were compared between the laparoscopic procedures and their RAS counterparts. Total costs and charges for cholecystectomy (the most common procedure in the dataset) were compared based on the payer and characteristics of hospital (region, rural/urban, bed size, and ownership). RESULTS: A total of 91,630 surgeries (87,965 laparoscopic, 3665 robotic) were analyzed. The average cost for the laparoscopic group was $10,227 ± $4986 versus $12,340 ± $5880 for the robotic cases (p < 0.001). The overall and percentage increases for laparoscopic versus robotic for each procedure were as follows: cholecystectomy $9618 versus $10,944 (14%), ventral hernia repair $10,739 versus $13,441 (25%), right colectomy $12,516 versus $15,027 (20%), left colectomy $14,157 versus $17,493 (24%), sigmoidectomy $13,504 versus $16,652 (23%), abdominoperineal resection $17,708 versus $19,605 (11%), and TAH $9368 versus $9923 (6%). Hysterectomy was the only procedure performed primarily using RAS and it was found to have the lowest increase in costs. Increased costs were associated with even higher increases in charges, especially in investor-owned private hospitals. CONCLUSION: RAS is more costly when compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery. Additional costs may be lower in centers that perform a higher volume of RAS. Further analysis of long-term outcomes (including reoperations and readmissions) is needed to better compare the life-long treatment costs for both surgical approaches.

Redirecting extracellular proteases to molecularly guide radiosensitizing drugs to tumors.

Patients with advanced cancers are treated with combined radiotherapy and chemotherapy, however curability is poor and treatment side effects severe. Drugs sensitizing tumors to radiotherapy have been developed to improve cell kill, but tumor specificity remains challenging. To achieve tumor selectivity of small molecule radiosensitizers, we tested as a strategy active tumor targeting using peptide-based drug conjugates. We attached an inhibitor of the DNA damage response to antibody or cell penetrating peptides. Antibody drug conjugates honed in on tumor overexpressed cell surface receptors with high specificity but lacked efficacy when conjugated to the DNA damage checkpoint kinase inhibitor AZD7762. As an alternative approach, we synthesized activatable cell penetrating peptide scaffolds that accumulated within tumors based on matrix metalloproteinase cleavage. While matrix metalloproteinases are integral to tumor progression, they have proven therapeutically elusive. We harnessed these pro-tumorigenic extracellular proteases to spatially guide radiosensitizer drug delivery using cleavable activatable cell penetrating peptides. Here, we tested the potential of these two drug delivery platforms targeting distinct tumor compartments in combination with radiotherapy and demonstrate the advantages of protease triggered cell penetrating peptide scaffolds over antibody drug conjugates to deliver small molecule amine radiosensitizers.