The RECOURSE Study: Long-term Oncologic Outcomes Associated With Robotically Assisted Minimally Invasive Procedures for Endometrial, Cervical, Colorectal, Lung, or Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess long-term outcomes with robotic versus laparoscopic/thoracoscopic and open surgery for colorectal, urologic, endometrial, cervical, and thoracic cancers. BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery provides perioperative benefits and similar oncological outcomes compared with open surgery. Recent robotic surgery data have questioned long-term benefits. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cancer outcomes based on surgical approach was conducted based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines using Pubmed, Scopus, and Embase. Hazard ratios for recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) were extracted/estimated using a hierarchical decision tree and pooled in RevMan 5.4 using inverse-variance fixed-effect (heterogeneity nonsignificant) or random effect models. RESULTS: Of 31,204 references, 199 were included (7 randomized, 23 database, 15 prospective, 154 retrospective studies)-157,876 robotic, 68,007 laparoscopic/thoracoscopic, and 234,649 open cases. Cervical cancer: OS and DFS were similar between robotic and laparoscopic [1.01 (0.56, 1.80), P =0.98] or open [1.18 (0.99, 1.41), P =0.06] surgery; 2 papers reported less recurrence with open surgery [2.30 (1.32, 4.01), P =0.003]. Endometrial cancer: the only significant result favored robotic over open surgery [OS; 0.77 (0.71, 0.83), P <0.001]. Lobectomy: DFS favored robotic over thoracoscopic surgery [0.74 (0.59, 0.93), P =0.009]; OS favored robotic over open surgery [0.93 (0.87, 1.00), P =0.04]. Prostatectomy: recurrence was less with robotic versus laparoscopic surgery [0.77 (0.68, 0.87), P <0.0001]; OS favored robotic over open surgery [0.78 (0.72, 0.85), P <0.0001]. Low-anterior resection: OS significantly favored robotic over laparoscopic [0.76 (0.63, 0.91), P =0.004] and open surgery [0.83 (0.74, 0.93), P =0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term outcomes were similar for robotic versus laparoscopic/thoracoscopic and open surgery, with no safety signal or indication requiring further research (PROSPERO Reg#CRD42021240519).

To develop, implement and evaluate an integrated care pathway for patients presenting with pneumothorax.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Pneumothorax is a common presentation to acute healthcare services in Ireland, however there is wide variation in management approaches between centres. There is robust evidence to demonstrate that ambulatory management of pneumothorax is feasible and safe. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the implementation of an integrated care pathway (ICP) for pneumothorax patients with a focus on ambulatory care would be economically beneficial for the healthcare system. METHODS: This study developed, implemented and evaluated an ICP for all patients presenting with pneumothorax, with a specific focus on ambulatory management for suitable patients. The ICP was designed to be utilised in the Irish healthcare setting, and was evaluated using a prospective multi-centre observational study, with a rigorous economic analysis at the centre of study design. MAIN FINDINGS: Implementation of the ICP resulted in a statistically significant reduction in inpatient length of stay of 2.84 days from 7.4 to 4.56 days (p = 0.001). The incremental per patient cost reduction of treating a patient according to the pneumothorax ICP was 2314 euro. There were no adverse events related to drain insertion at the study sites. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates therefore that standardisation of care for pneumothorax patients with a focus on ambulatory management are economically beneficial for the publicly-funded healthcare service. It is envisaged that this work will be used to inform healthcare policy at a national level across Ireland.

Impact of type of minimally invasive approach on open conversions across ten common procedures in different specialties.

BACKGROUND: Conversion rates during minimally invasive surgery are generally examined in the limited scope of a particular procedure. However, for a hospital or payor, the cumulative impact of conversions during commonly performed procedures could have a much larger negative effect than what is appreciated by individual surgeons. The aim of this study is to assess open conversion rates during minimally invasive surgery (MIS) across common procedures using laparoscopic/thoracoscopic (LAP/VATS) and robotic-assisted (RAS) approaches. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using the Premier Database on patients who underwent common operations (hysterectomy, lobectomy, right colectomy, benign sigmoidectomy, low anterior resection, inguinal and ventral hernia repair, and partial nephrectomy) between January 2013 and September 2015. ICD-9 and CPT codes were used to define procedures, modality, and conversion. Propensity scores were calculated using patient, hospital, and surgeon characteristics. Propensity-score matched analysis was used to compare conversions between LAP/VATS and RAS for each procedure. RESULTS: A total of 278,520 patients had MIS approaches of the ten operations. Conversion occurred in 5% of patients and was associated with a 1.77 day incremental increase in length of stay and $3441 incremental increase in cost. RAS was associated with a 58.5% lower rate of conversion to open surgery compared to LAP/VATS. CONCLUSION: At a health system or payer level, conversion to open is detrimental not just for the patient and surgeon but also puts a significant strain on hospital resources. Use of RAS was associated with less than half of the conversion rate observed for LAP/VATS.

Assessment of Robotic Console Skills (ARCS): construct validity of a novel global rating scale for technical skills in robotically assisted surgery.

BACKGROUND: Skill assessment during robotically assisted surgery remains challenging. While the popularity of the Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotics Skills (GEARS) has grown, its lack of discrimination between independent console skills limits its usefulness. The purpose of this study was to evaluate construct validity and interrater reliability of a novel assessment designed to overcome this limitation. METHODS: We created the Assessment of Robotic Console Skills (ARCS), a global rating scale with six console skill domains. Fifteen volunteers who were console surgeons for 0 ("novice"), 1-100 ("intermediate"), or >100 ("experienced") robotically assisted procedures performed three standardized tasks. Three blinded raters scored the task videos using ARCS, with a 5-point Likert scale for each skill domain. Scores were analyzed for evidence of construct validity and interrater reliability. RESULTS: Group demographics were indistinguishable except for the number of robotically assisted procedures performed (p = 0.001). The mean scores of experienced subjects exceeded those of novices in dexterity (3.8 > 1.4, p < 0.001), field of view (4.1 > 1.8, p < 0.001), instrument visualization (3.9 > 2.2, p < 0.001), manipulator workspace (3.6 > 1.9, p = 0.001), and force sensitivity (4.3 > 2.6, p < 0.001). The mean scores of intermediate subjects exceeded those of novices in dexterity (2.8 > 1.4, p = 0.002), field of view (2.8 > 1.8, p = 0.021), instrument visualization (3.2 > 2.2, p = 0.045), manipulator workspace (3.1 > 1.9, p = 0.004), and force sensitivity (3.7 > 2.6, p = 0.033). The mean scores of experienced subjects exceeded those of intermediates in dexterity (3.8 > 2.8, p = 0.003), field of view (4.1 > 2.8, p < 0.001), and instrument visualization (3.9 > 3.2, p = 0.044). Rater agreement in each domain demonstrated statistically significant concordance (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We present strong evidence for construct validity and interrater reliability of ARCS. Our study shows that learning curves for some console skills plateau faster than others. Therefore, ARCS may be more useful than GEARS to evaluate distinct console skills. Future studies will examine why some domains did not adequately differentiate between subjects and applications for intraoperative use.

Robotic-assisted benign hysterectomy compared with laparoscopic, vaginal, and open surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The potential benefits and limitations of benign hysterectomy surgical approaches are still debated. We aimed at evaluating any differences with a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases were last searched on 6/2/2021 to identify English randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective cohort and retrospective independent database studies published between Jan 1, 2010 and Dec 31, 2020 reporting perioperative outcomes following robotic hysterectomy versus laparoscopic, open, or vaginal approach (PROSPERO #CRD42022352718). Twenty-four articles were included that reported on 110,306 robotic, 262,715 laparoscopic, 189,237 vaginal, and 554,407 open patients. The robotic approach was associated with a shorter hospital stay (p < 0.00001), less blood loss (p = 0.009), and fewer complications (OR: 0.42 [0.27, 0.66], p = 0.0001) when compared to the open approach. The main benefit compared to the laparoscopic and vaginal approaches was a shorter hospital (R/L WMD: - 0.144 [- 0.21, - 0.08], p < 0.0001; R/V WMD: - 0.39 [- 0.70, - 0.08], p = 0.01). Other benefits seen were sensitive to the inclusion of database studies. Study type differences in outcomes, a lack of RCTs for robotic vs. open comparisons, learning curve issues, and limited robotic vs. vaginal publications are limitations. While the robotic approach was mainly comparable to the laparoscopic approach, this meta-analysis confirms the classic benefits of minimally invasive surgery when comparing robotic hysterectomy to open surgery. We also reported the advantages of robotic surgery over vaginal surgery in a patient population with a higher incidence of large uterus and prior surgery.

Systematic literature review of cost-effectiveness analyses of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for localised prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Review and assess cost-effectiveness studies of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) for localised prostate cancer compared with open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). DESIGN: Systematic review. SETTING: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, International HTA database, the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination database and various HTA websites were searched (January 2005 to March 2021) to identify the eligible cost-effectiveness studies. PARTICIPANTS: Cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, or cost-minimization analyses examining RARP versus ORP or LRP were included in this systematic review. INTERVENTIONS: Different surgical approaches to treat localized prostate cancer: RARP compared with ORP and LRP. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: A structured narrative synthesis was developed to summarize results of cost, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness results (eg, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]). Study quality was assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria Extended checklist. Application of medical device features were evaluated. RESULTS: Twelve studies met inclusion criteria, 11 of which were cost-utility analyses. Higher quality-adjusted life-years and higher costs were observed with RARP compared with ORP or LRP in 11 studies (91%). Among four studies comparing RARP with LRP, three reported RARP was dominant or cost-effective. Among ten studies comparing RARP with ORP, RARP was more cost-effective in five, not cost-effective in two, and inconclusive in three studies. Studies with longer time horizons tended to report favorable cost-effectiveness results for RARP. Nine studies (75%) were rated of moderate or good quality. Recommended medical device features were addressed to varying degrees within the literature as follows: capital investment included in most studies, dynamic pricing considered in about half, and learning curve and incremental innovation were poorly addressed. CONCLUSIONS: Despite study heterogeneity, RARP was more costly and effective compared with ORP and LRP in most studies and likely to be more cost-effective, particularly over a multiple year or lifetime time horizon. Further cost-effectiveness analyses for RARP that more thoroughly consider medical device features and use an appropriate time horizon are needed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021246811.

Is robotic lobectomy cheaper? A micro-cost analysis.

Higher capital costs and operating room costs associated with Lobectomy via Robot Assisted Thoracic Surgery (RATS) have previously been suggested as the principal contributors to the elevated overall cost. This study uses a micro-costing approach to a previous analysis of clinical outcomes of RATS, Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery (VATS) and Open Lobectomy to evaluate the most significant cost drivers for the higher cost of robot-assisted lobectomy. A micro-costing model was developed to reflect the pathway of patients from day of surgery through the first 30 days following lobectomy. Costs were provided for RATS, VATS and Open approaches. Sensitivity analysis was performed specifically in the area of staff costs. A threshold sensitivity analysis of the overall cost components was also performed. Total cost per case for the RATS approach was €13,321 for the VATS approach €11,567, and for the Open approach €12,582. The overall cost differences were driven primarily by the elevated consumable costs associated with RATS Lobectomy. Capital costs account for a relatively small proportion of the per-case cost difference. This study presents a detailed analysis of the cost drivers for lobectomy, modelled for the three primary surgical approaches. We believe this is a useful tool for surgeons, hospital management, and service commissioning agencies to accurately and comprehensively determine where cost savings can be applied in their programme to improve the cost-effectiveness of RATS lobectomy.

Cost-effectiveness of Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer in the UK.

Importance: The cost-effectiveness of different surgical techniques for radical prostatectomy remains a subject of debate. Emergence of recent critical clinical data and changes in surgical equipment costs due to their shared use by different clinical specialties necessitate an updated cost-effectiveness analysis in a centralized, largely government-funded health care system such as the UK National Health Service (NHS). Objective: To compare robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) with open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and laparoscopic-assisted radical prostatectomy (LRP) using contemporary data on clinical outcomes, costs, and surgical volumes in the UK. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic analysis used a Markov model developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of RARP, LRP, and ORP to treat localized prostate cancer. The model was constructed from the perspective of the UK NHS. The model simulated 65-year-old men who underwent radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer and were followed up for a 10-year period. Data were analyzed from May 1, 2020, to July 31, 2021. Exposures: Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy, LRP, and ORP. Main Outcomes and Measures: Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs (direct medical costs and costs outside the NHS), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results: Compared with LRP, RARP cost £1785 (US $2350) less and had 0.24 more QALYs gained; thus, RARP was a dominant option compared with LRP. Compared with ORP, RARP had 0.12 more QALYs gained but cost £526 (US $693) more during the 10-year time frame, resulting in an ICER of £4293 (US $5653)/QALY. Because the ICER was below the £30 000 (US $39 503) willingness-to-pay threshold, RARP was more cost-effective than ORP in the UK. The most sensitive variable influencing the cost-effectiveness of RARP was the lower risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR). Scenario analysis indicated RARP would remain more cost-effective than ORP as long as the BCR hazard ratios comparing RARP vs ORP were less than 0.99. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that in the UK, RARP has an ICER lower than the willingness-to-pay threshold and thus is likely a cost-effective surgical treatment option for patients with localized prostate cancer compared with ORP and LRP. The results were mainly driven by the lower risk of BCR for RARP. These findings may differ in other health care settings where different thresholds and costs may apply.

Methodology to standardize heterogeneous statistical data presentations for combining time-to-event oncologic outcomes.

Survival analysis following oncological treatments require specific analysis techniques to account for data considerations, such as failure to observe the time of event, patient withdrawal, loss to follow-up, and differential follow up. These techniques can include Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard analyses. However, studies do not always report overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), or cancer recurrence using hazard ratios, making the synthesis of such oncologic outcomes difficult. We propose a hierarchical utilization of methods to extract or estimate the hazard ratio to standardize time-to-event outcomes so that study inclusion into meta-analyses can be maximized. We also provide proof-of concept results from a statistical analysis that compares OS, DFS, and cancer recurrence for robotic surgery to open and non-robotic minimally invasive surgery. In our example, use of the proposed methodology would allow for the increase in data inclusion from 108 hazard ratios reported to 240 hazard ratios reported or estimated, resulting in an increase of 122%. While there are publications summarizing the motivation for these analyses, and comprehensive papers describing strategies to obtain estimates from published time-dependent analyses, we are not aware of a manuscript that describes a prospective framework for an analysis of this scale focusing on the inclusion of a maximum number of publications reporting on long-term oncologic outcomes incorporating various presentations of statistical data.

Clinical and cost comparisons for hysterectomy via abdominal, standard laparoscopic, vaginal and robot-assisted approaches.

INTRODUCTION: The goal of this study was to compare outcomes and costs of four methods of hysterectomy: abdominal, standard laparoscopic, vaginal and robot-assisted approaches. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective medical chart review of 1474 consecutive hysterectomy patients with benign indications. RESULTS: Implementation of a robotics program at our institution resulted in reductions in abdominal (33 percent to 8 percent) and laparoscopic (29 percent to 5 percent) hysterectomies. Robotic surgery demonstrated the least blood loss and shortest hospital stays (both p < 0.0001), despite greater case complexity. Overall complication rates were highest for abdominal procedures (14 percent) and similar across minimally invasive approaches (8 to 9 percent). Conversion rates were four times greater in laparoscopic than vaginal or robotic hysterectomy (p = 0.01). Vaginal hysterectomy, performed in the least complex cases, had the lowest major complication rate (1.5 percent) and lowest costs. Costs for robotic surgery were similar to abdominal and laparoscopic approaches when robots were not depreciated as direct surgical expenses. CONCLUSIONS: Vaginal hysterectomy was the least expensive surgical option. Robotic surgery reduced morbidity, conversions and hospital stays even in complex cases, without incurring additional costs beyond purchase of the robotic system.

Visual cues as a surrogate for tactile feedback during robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: posterolateral margin rates in 1340 consecutive patients.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse consecutive cases of robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP), present the incidence of nerve-sparing-related positive surgical margins (SM+), include visual cues that might assist in smoothly changing to the robotic platform, and discuss the scientific rationale for 'intersensory integration' which might explain the 'reverse Braille' phenomenon, i.e. the ability to feel when vision is greatly enhanced, as the lack of tactile feedback during RALP is often cited as a disadvantage of robotic surgery, interfering with a surgeon's ability to make intraoperative oncological decisions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from 1340 consecutive patients undergoing RALP from one institution were analysed and trends for positive posterolateral SM+ (PLSM+) were correlated with oncological variables before and after RALP. A sample of patient slides were reviewed by a extramural pathologist. Multivariate regression modelling was used to compare the projected rates of PLSM+ vs the actual rate, given the effect of a conscious effort to use visual cues. Finally, video recordings of the procedure were systematically reviewed and correlated with anatomical and histopathological images in an integrated session involving the surgeon and the pathology team. RESULTS: The incidence of PLSM+ was 2.1%, which gradually declined to 1.0% in the last 100 patients. The reduction in PLSM+ occurred despite an increased rate of high-risk tumours operated on during this period. Forecasting analysis showed that the actual PLSM+ rate declined by half in the most recent 1000 patients, due to an integrated effort involving the use of visual cues during surgery. The following visual cues were considered important; appreciation of periprostatic (lateral prostatic) fascial compartments; colour and texture of the tissue; periprostatic veins as a landmark for athermal dissection; signs of inflammation; and a freely separating bloodless plane showing loose shiny areolar tissue. CONCLUSION: Adapting to the robotic platform is easy and there is no compromise of the oncological safety of this procedure. Experienced surgeons can use visual cues to assist during nerve-sparing RALP and achieve low PLSM+ rates.

The first 100 da Vinci hysterectomies: an analysis of the learning curve for a single surgeon.

BACKGROUND: Robotic gynecologic procedures were FDA-approved in March 2005. Published average times for robotic hysterectomies vary from 192 minutes to 242 minutes and one report indicated operative times ranging from 4.5 to ten hours. Many critics cite learning curves and increased operative times as a deterrent to performing robotic hysterectomies. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of surgical times (learning curve) for the first 100 consecutive extrafascial hysterectomies with or without salpingo-oophorectomy for a single surgeon. Operating times were recorded by operating room nursing staff for each case. The times reported are from "skin to skin," which is defined as from when the surgeon started to place anything vaginally until the last suture was placed to close the trocar sites. We report average times for hysterectomy per 20 cases. RESULTS: The average time for hysterectomies was as follows: First 20 cases--124 minutes, second 20 cases--94 minutes, third 20 cases--85 minutes, fourth 20 cases--88 minutes, fifth 20 cases--81 minutes. Age, body mass index and uterine weights were comparable between groups. Complications were highest in the first 20 at 15 percent, compared with 5 percent for the remaining groups, but this did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: The learning curve for da Vinci hysterectomies is steep, with the maximum improvement in surgical times in the first 20 cases. Minimal improvement was demonstrated after this.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic versus open and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery approaches for lobectomy.

OBJECTIVES: A number of meta-analytical and database studies have sought to compare open, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and robotic operative approaches to lobectomy, often with conflicting results. Our objective was to perform a comprehensive review of these meta-analytical and database studies published to date. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using the PubMed and Scopus databases. Primary outcome was short-term mortality, and secondary outcomes were operative time, blood loss or transfusion rate, hospital stay, conversions, lymph node yield and complications. Meta-analyses of the primary and secondary outcomes were performed. RESULTS: Robotic lobectomy is a valid alternative to the VATS approach and is superior to the open approach with respect to complications [OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.58-0.76, P < 0.00001] and duration of hospital stay (WMD -1.4, 95% CI -1.96-0.85, P < 0.00001). It is inferior to both VATS and open with respect to operative duration (robotic vs. VATS; WMD 4.98, 95% CI 2.61-7.36, P < 0.001, robotic vs. open WMD 65.56, 95% CI 53.66-77.46, P < 0.00001). Robotic approach is superior with respect to 30-day mortality compared to VATS (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45-0.83, P = 0.001 and open approaches (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.33-0.85, P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest published systematic review and meta-analysis to date qualifying the robotic lobectomy as a reasonable alternative to VATS and open surgery. Short-term survival is superior in the robotic cohorts. No definitive conclusions on long-term outcomes can be drawn until a randomized controlled trial comparing approaches is conducted.

A systematic review of robotic versus open and video assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) approaches for thymectomy.

BACKGROUND: Median sternotomy has been the most commonly used approach for thymectomy to date. Recent advances in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and robotic access with CO2 insufflation techniques have allowed more minimally invasive approaches. However, prior reviews have not compared robotic to both open and VATS thymectomy. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines using PubMed, Embase and Scopus databases. Original research articles comparing robotic to VATS or to open thymectomy for myasthenia gravis, anterior mediastinal masses, or thymomas were included. Meta-analyses were performed for mortality, operative time, blood loss, transfusions, length of stay, conversion to open, intraoperative and postoperative complication rates, and positive/negative margin rates. RESULTS: Robotic thymectomy is a valid alternative to the open approach; advantages include: reduced blood loss [weighted mean difference (WMD): -173.03, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): -305.90, -40.17, P=0.01], fewer postoperative complications (odds ratio: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.22, 0.60, P<0.00001), a shorter hospital stay (WMD: -2.78, 95% CI: -3.22, -2.33, P<0.00001), and a lower positive margin rate (relative difference: -0.04, 95% CI: -0.07, -0.01, P=0.01), with comparable operative times (WMD: 6.73, 95% CI: -21.20, 34.66, P=0.64). Robotic thymectomy was comparable with the VATS approach; both have the advantage of avoiding median sternotomy. CONCLUSIONS: While randomized controlled studies are required to make definitive conclusions, current data suggests that robotic thymectomy is superior to open surgery and comparable to a VATS approach. Long-term follow-up is required to further delineate oncological outcomes.

Comparison of outcomes and cost for endometrial cancer staging via traditional laparotomy, standard laparoscopy and robotic techniques.

OBJECTIVES: The study purpose was to compare hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy completed via robotic assistance, laparotomy, and laparoscopy for endometrial cancer staging with respect to operative and peri-operative outcomes, complications, adequacy of staging, and cost. METHODS: One hundred and ten patients underwent hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer staging. All cases were performed by a single surgeon, at a single institution (40 robotic, 40 laparotomy, and 30 laparoscopic) and were retrospectively reviewed to compare demographics and peri-operative variables including, operative time, estimated blood loss, lymph node count, hospital stay, complications, and return to normal activity. Additionally, a cost comparison between all three modalities was performed. RESULTS: Patients undergoing robotic assisted hysterectomy and staging experienced longer operative time than the laparotomy cohort with no difference in comparison to the laparoscopic cohort (184 min, 108.6 min, 171 min, p<0.0001, p=0.14). Estimated blood loss was significantly reduced for the robotic cohort in comparison to the laparotomy cohort and comparable to laparoscopic cohort (166 cc, 316 cc, 253 cc, p=0.01, p=0.25). The complication rate was lowest in the robotic cohort (7.5%) relative to the laparotomy (27.5%) and laparoscopic cohorts (20%) (p=0.015, p=0.03). Average return to normal activity for the robotic patients was significantly shorter than those undergoing laparotomy (24.1 days versus 52 days, p<0.0001) and those undergoing laparoscopy (31.6 days, p=0.005). Lymph node retrieval did not differ between the 3 groups (robotic 17 nodes, laparotomy 14 nodes, laparoscopic 17 nodes). The total average cost for hysterectomy with staging completed via laparotomy was $12,943.60, for standard laparoscopy $7569.80, and for robotic assistance $8212.00. The difference in cost between laparotomy and robotic cohorts was significant p=0.0001 while there was no statistically significant difference in cost between laparoscopy and robotic cohorts p=0.06. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic hysterectomy provides comparable node retrieval to laparotomy and laparoscopic procedures in the case of the experienced laparoscopic surgeon. While robotic hysterectomy takes longer to perform than hysterectomy completed via laparotomy, it is equivalent to laparoscopic hysterectomy and provides the patient with a more expeditious return to normal activity with reduced post-operative morbidity. Additionally, the average cost for hysterectomy and staging was highest for laparotomy, followed by robotic, and least for standard laparoscopy.

Integrated coronary revascularization: percutaneous coronary intervention plus robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass.

BACKGROUND: Robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass (TECAB) of the left anterior descending artery (LAD) coupled with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of a second coronary artery has been investigated in patients with multivessel disease to provide a minimally invasive therapeutic option. METHODS AND RESULTS: TECAB of the LAD was performed using the left internal mammary artery (LIMA). A second lesion was treated with PCI before surgery, simultaneously, or after surgery. Three-month angiographic follow-up was performed in all patients and was subject to independent review. A total of 27 patients requiring double vessel revascularization were treated at 7 centers. Eleven patients underwent PCI before surgery, 12 patients underwent PCI after surgery, and 4 patients underwent simultaneous surgical and percutaneous intervention. Ten patients (37%) were treated with bare metal stents, whereas 17 patients (63%) were treated with drug-eluting stents. Postoperative angiographic evaluation demonstrated an overall LIMA anastomotic patency of 96.3% and PCI vessel patency of 66.7%. There were no deaths or strokes. One patient experienced a perioperative myocardial infarction. Eight of 27 patients (29.6%) required reintervention, 1 LIMA anastomotic stenosis (3.7%), 3 after bare metal stent (30%), and 4 after drug-eluting stent placement (23.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Integrated revascularization treatment plans provide minimally invasive options for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. This approach may be accomplished with no mortality, low perioperative morbidity, and excellent angiographic LIMA patency. The reintervention rate after PCI in this series was higher than that reported elsewhere and should be investigated further. The choice of suitable vessel, type of stent and timing of the treatment must be carefully considered before implementing this hybrid strategy.

The impact of robotics on the mode of benign hysterectomy and clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The impact of robotics on benign hysterectomy surgical approach, clinical outcomes, and learning curve is still unclear. METHODS: Review of abdominal, vaginal, laparoscopic, or robotic cases in 156 US hospitals in the Premier Research Database. RESULTS: Of 289 875 hysterectomies, abdominal cases decreased from 2005-2010 (60-33%) and minimally invasive approaches increased (40-67%). Conversion rates were: 0.04% for vaginal, 2.5% for robotic, and 7.2% for laparoscopy (P < 0.001). Robotic surgery time was longest (3.4 h vs. 2.2 vaginal, 2.5 abdominal, 2.7 laparoscopy, P < 0.001). Robotic complication rate was lowest (14.8% vs. 16.2% vaginal, 18.6% laparoscopy, 28.9% abdominal, P < 0.001). Hospital stay was longer following abdominal surgery (3.5 days vs. 1.8 robotic, 1.9 vaginal, 1.8 laparoscopy, P < 0.001). Robotic surgery times and conversion and complication rates improved with experience (2.8 h, 2%, and 13.9%, respectively), even with increasing complexity. CONCLUSIONS: Robotics was successfully incorporated without jeopardizing patient outcomes and increased the overall use of minimally invasive approaches.

Fertility and Symptom Relief following Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Myomectomy.

Objective. To examine success of robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy (RALM) measured by sustained symptom relief and fertility. Methods. This is a retrospective survey of 426 women who underwent RALM for fibroids, symptom relief, or infertility at three practice sites across the US. We examined rates of symptom recurrence and pregnancy and factors associated with these outcomes. Results. Overall, 70% of women reported being symptom-free, with 62.9% free of symptoms after three years. At >3 years, 66.7% of women who underwent surgery to treat infertility and 80% who were also symptom-free reported achieving pregnancy. Factors independently associated with symptom recurrence included greater time after surgery, preoperative dyspareunia, multiple fibroid surgeries, smoking after surgery, and preexisting diabetes. Factors positively correlated with achieving pregnancy included desiring pregnancy, prior pregnancy, greater time since surgery, and Caucasian race. Factors negatively correlated with pregnancy were advanced age and symptom recurrence. Conclusions. This paper, the first to examine symptom recurrence after RALM, demonstrates both short- and long-term effectiveness in providing symptom relief. Furthermore, RALM may have the potential to improve the chance of conception, even in a population at high risk of subfertility, with greater benefits among those who remain symptom-free. These findings require prospective validation.

Learning curve assessment of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open-surgery controls from the premier perspective database.

INTRODUCTION: The primary aims of this study were to assess the learning curve effect of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in a large administrative database consisting of multiple U.S. hospitals and surgeons, and to compare the results of RARP with open radical prostatectomy (ORP) from the same settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The patient population of study was from the Premier Perspective Database (Premier, Inc., Charlotte, NC) and consisted of 71,312 radical prostatectomies performed at more than 300 U.S. hospitals by up to 3739 surgeons by open or robotic techniques from 2004 to 2010. The key endpoints were surgery time, inpatient length of stay, and overall complications. We compared open versus robotic, results by year of procedures, results by case volume of specific surgeons, and results of open surgery in hospitals with and without a robotic system. RESULTS: The mean surgery time was longer for RARP (4.4 hours, standard deviation [SD] 1.7) compared with ORP (3.4 hours, SD 1.5) in the same hospitals (p<0.0001). Inpatient stay was shorter for RARP (2.2 days, SD 1.9) compared with ORP (3.2 days, SD 2.7) in the same hospitals (p<0.0001). The overall complications were less for RARP (10.6%) compared with ORP (15.8%) in the same hospitals, as were transfusion rates. ORP results in hospitals without a robot were not better than ORP with a robot, and pretreatment co-morbidity profiles were similar in all cohorts. Trending of results by year of procedure showed no differences in the three cohorts, but trending of RARP results by surgeon experience showed improvements in surgery time, hospital stay, conversion rates, and complication rates. CONCLUSIONS: During the initial 7 years of RARP development, outcomes showed decreased hospital stay, complications, and transfusion rates. Learning curve trends for RARP were evident for these endpoints when grouped by surgeon experience, but not by year of surgery.