Increased cost burden associated with robot-assisted rectopexy: do patient outcomes justify increased expenditure?

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted surgical techniques have flourished over the years, with refinement in instrumentation and optics allowing for adaptation and increasing utilization across surgical fields. Transabdominal rectopexy with mesh for rectal prolapse may stand to benefit significantly from the use of a robotic platform. However, increased operative times and immediate associated costs of robotic surgery may provide a counterargument to widespread adoption. METHODS: To determine which approach to the treatment of rectal prolapse, laparoscopic or robotic, is more cost effective and provides better outcomes with fewer complications, a retrospective review was performed at a single tertiary care academic institution from May 2013 to December 2020. Twenty-two patients underwent transabdominal mesh rectopexy through a robot-assisted DaVinci platform (Intuitive Sunnyvale, CA), and thirty through a laparoscopic platform. Main outcome measures included operative, hospital, and total cost as defined by total charges billed. Secondary outcomes included rate of recurrence, intra-operative complications, median operative time, post-operative complications, average hospital length of stay, inpatient pain medication usage, and post-operative functional outcomes. RESULTS: Cost analysis for robot-assisted versus laparoscopic rectopexy demonstrated operating room costs of $46,118 ± $9329 for the robotic group, versus $33,090 ± $15,395 (p = 0.002) for the laparoscopic group. Inpatient hospital costs were $60,723 ± $20,170 vs. $40,798 ± $14,325 (p = 0.001), and total costs were $106,841 ± $25,513 vs. $73,888 ± $28,129 (p ≤ 0.001). When secondary outcomes were compared for the robotic versus laparoscopic groups, there were no differences in any of the aforementioned outcome variables except for operative time, which was 79 min longer in the robotic group (p ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted mesh rectopexy demonstrated no clinical benefit over traditional laparoscopic mesh rectopexy, with significantly higher operative and hospital costs. A reduction in the acquisition and maintenance costs for robotic surgery is needed before large-scale adoption and implementation of the robotic platform for this procedure.

Evaluation of Operative Notes for Splenic Flexure Mobilization: Are the Key Aspects Being Reported?

Background: Given the importance of operative documentation, we reviewed operative notes for surgeries that required splenic flexure mobilization (SFM) to determine their accuracy. Materials and Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 51 operative notes for complete SFMs performed at a single institution from January 2015 to June 2020. Results: None of the operative notes reported a rationale for performing SFM, use of preoperative imaging to guide technical approach, reasoning for the operative method and mobilization approach used, or specific steps taken to ensure that SFM was done safely. Most reports did not include technical details, with one-third of the notes merely reporting that "the splenic flexure was mobilized." Conclusions: Increased awareness about the lack of operative documentation of the critical aspects of the SFM could stimulate initiatives to standardize the SFM method and improve the quality of operative notes for SFM.

Incidental Adrenal Masses: Adherence to Guidelines and Methods to Improve Initial Follow-Up: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Incidental adrenal masses (IAMs) are detected in approximately 1%-2% of abdominal computed tomography (CT) scans. Recent estimates suggest that more than 70-million relevant CT scans are performed annually in the United States; thus, IAMs represent a significant clinical entity. Most clinical guidelines recommend an initial follow-up evaluation that includes imaging and biochemical testing after index IAM detection. METHODS: Systematic review of literature in the PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science databases to determine whether guidelines regarding IAM evaluation are followed and to identify effective management strategies. Our initial search was in January 2018 and updated in November, 2019. RESULTS: 31 studies met inclusion criteria. In most institutions, only a minority of patients with IAMs undergo initial follow-up imaging (median 34%, IQR 20%-50%) or biochemical testing (median 18%, IQR 15%-28%). 2 interventions shown to improve IAM evaluation are IAM-specific recommendations in radiology reports and dedicated multi-disciplinary teams. Interventions focused solely on alerting the ordering clinician or primary care provider to the presence of an IAM have not demonstrated effectiveness. Patients who are referred to an endocrinologist are more likely to have a complete IAM evaluation, but few are referred. DISCUSSION: Most patients with an IAM do not have an initial evaluation. The radiology report has been identified as a key component in determining whether IAMs are evaluated appropriately. Care teams dedicated to management of incidental radiographic findings also improve IAM follow-up. Although the evidence base is sparse, these interventions may be a starting point for further inquiry into optimizing care in this common clinical scenario.

Minimally Invasive Management of Diverticular Disease.

Traditionally, management of complicated diverticular disease has involved open damage control operations with large definitive resections and colostomies. Studies are now showing that in a subset of patients who would typically have undergone an open Hartmann's procedure for Hinchey III/IV diverticulitis, a laparoscopic approach is equally safe, and has better outcomes. Similar patients may be good candidates for primary anastomosis to avoid the morbidity and subsequent reversal of a colostomy. While most operations for diverticulitis across the country are still performed open, there has been an incremental shift in practice toward minimally invasive approaches in the elective setting. The most recent data from large trials, most notably the SIGMA trial, found laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy is associated with fewer short-term and long-term complications, decreased pain, improvement in length of stay, and maintains better cost-effectiveness than open resections. Some studies even demonstrate that robotic sigmoid resections can maintain a similar if not more reduction in morbidity as the laparoscopic approach while still remaining cost-effective. Intraoperative approaches also factor into improving outcomes. One of the most feared complications in colorectal surgery is anastomotic leak, and many studies have sought to find ways to minimize this risk. Factors to consider to minimize incidence of leak are the creation of tension-free anastomoses, amount of contamination, adequacy of blood supply, and a patient's use of steroids. Techniques supported by data that decrease anastomotic leaks include preoperative oral antibiotic and mechanical bowel prep, intraoperative splenic flexure mobilization, low-tie ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery, and use of indocyanine green immunofluorescence to assess perfusion. In summary, the management of benign diverticular disease is shifting from open, morbid operations for a very common disease to a minimally invasive approach. In this article, we review those approaches shown to have better outcomes, greater patient satisfaction, and fewer complications.

The Impact of Racial Residential Segregation on Colorectal Cancer Outcomes and Treatment.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the impact of racial residential segregation on Black-White disparities in colorectal cancer diagnosis, surgical resection, and cancer-specific survival. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: There are clear Black-White disparities in colorectal cancer diagnosis and treatment with equally disparate explanations for these findings, including genetics, socioeconomic factors, and health behaviors. METHODS: Data on Black and White patients with colorectal cancer were obtained from SEER between 2005 and 2015. The exposure of interest was the index of dissimilarity (IoD), a validated measure of segregation derived from 2010 Census data. Outcomes included advanced stage at diagnosis (AJCC stage IV), resection of localized disease (AJCC stage I-II), and cancer-specific survival. We used Poisson regression with robust error variance for the outcomes of interest and Cox proportional hazards were used to assess cancer-specific 5-year survival. RESULTS: Black patients had a 41% increased risk of presenting at advanced stage per IoD [risk ratio (RR) 1.41, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.18, 1.69] and White patients saw a 17% increase (RR 1.17, 95%CI 1.04, 1.31). Black patients were 5% less likely to undergo surgical resection (RR 0.95, 95%CI 0.90, 0.99), whereas Whites were 5% more likely (RR 1.05, 95%CI 1.03, 1.07). Black patients had 43% increased hazards of cancer-specific mortality with increasing IoD (hazard ratio (HR) 1.43, 95%CI 1.17, 1.74). CONCLUSIONS: Black patients with colorectal cancer living in more segregated counties are significantly more likely to present at advanced stage and have worse cancer-specific survival. Enduring structural racism in the form of residential segregation has strong impacts on the colorectal cancer outcomes.