Cost-effectiveness analysis of revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: laparoscopic vs. robot assisted

Economic Evaluations of Robotic-Assisted Surgery: Methods, Challenges and Opportunities

BACKGROUND

The use of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) is growing rapidly. However, economic evaluation of this technology is challenging. This study aims to identify and discuss the different economic evaluation methods which have been used to evaluate RAS.

METHOD

This scoping review systematically searched PubMed and Embase from 2015 to 2023. We included economic evaluation studies comparing RAS versus laparoscopic or open surgery. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist was used to aid data extraction and was extended to cover additional features relevant to RAS, including learning curve, organisational impact, incremental innovation and dynamic pricing.

RESULTS

A total of 50 economic evaluations of RAS were included. Cost-utility analysis (46%) was the most commonly applied economic evaluation method, followed by cost-consequence analysis (32%). The studies focused on the specialties of urology (42%), hepato-pancreato-biliary (20%), colorectal (14%) and gynaecology (6%). Distinctive features related to the assessment of RAS were under-addressed in economic evaluations. Only 40% of the included studies considered learning curve and organisational impact and less than 12% of the included studies reflected on incremental innovation and dynamic pricing.

CONCLUSIONS

This review found that some studies have incorporated challenges specific to RAS in their evaluations. However, most studies still lack key aspects of importance. In particular, studies rarely considered the ability of RAS platforms to be shared across multiple specialities. Incorporating these distinctive features offers an opportunity for economic evaluation to provide decision-makers with a more realistic assessment of the cost-effectiveness of this technology and to ensure its optimal utilisation in clinical practice.

Robotic versus laparoscopic revisional bariatric surgeries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

In recent years, the need for revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) procedures has experienced a noteworthy surge to confront complexities and weight recidivism. Despite being a subject of controversy for many, the utilization of the Da Vinci robotic platform (Intuitive Surgical, Inc.) may present benefits in RBS. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of robotic RBS in comparison to Laparoscopic RBS.

Methods

A meticulous and thorough analysis was ensured through a comprehensive exploration of the literature, which included PubMed, Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane. This exploration was conducted in adherence to the directives outlined in the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used for quality assessment.

Results

A total of 11 studies were included in this meta-analysis, comprising 55,889 in the laparoscopic group and 5,809 in the robotic group. No significant differences were observed in the leak, bleeding, operative time, or length of stay across both groups. However, the robotic group showed higher rates of conversion to open surgery (odds ratio [OR], 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-0.79; p < 0.0001; I2 = 0%), reoperation (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.57-0.87; p = 0.0009; I2 = 6%), and readmission (higher rate of readmission in the robotic group; OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.62-0.92; p = 0.005; I2 = 30%).

Conclusion

Robotic-assisted bariatric surgery has no significant advantage over conventional laparoscopic surgery. Further research is warranted to explore and evaluate surgeons' methodology and proficiency differences.

Impact of Robotic Assistance on Complications in Bariatric Surgery at Expert Laparoscopic Surgery Centers: A Retrospective Comparative Study With Propensity Score

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the way robotic assistance affected rate of complications in bariatric surgery at expert robotic and laparoscopic surgery facilities.

BACKGROUND

While the benefits of robotic assistance were established at the beginning of surgical training, there is limited data on the robot's influence on experienced bariatric laparoscopic surgeons.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study using the BRO clinical database (2008-2022) collecting data of patients operated on in expert centers. We compared the serious complication rate (defined as a Clavien score≥3) in patients undergoing metabolic bariatric surgery with or without robotic assistance. We used a directed acyclic graph to identify the variables adjustment set used in a multivariable linear regression, and a propensity score matching to calculate the average treatment effect (ATE) of robotic assistance.

RESULTS

The study included 35,043 patients [24,428 sleeve gastrectomy (SG); 10,452 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB); 163 single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S)], with 938 operated on with robotic assistance (801 SG; 134 RYGB; 3 SADI-S), among 142 centers. Overall, we found no benefit of robotic assistance regarding the risk of complications (average treatment effect=-0.05, P =0.794), with no difference in the RYGB+SADI group ( P =0.322) but a negative trend in the SG group (more complications, P =0.060). Length of hospital stay was decreased in the robot group (3.7±11.1 vs 4.0±9.0 days, P <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic assistance reduced the length of stay but did not statistically significantly reduce postoperative complications (Clavien score≥3) following either GBP or SG. A tendency toward an elevated risk of complications following SG requires more supporting studies.

Senhance Robotic Platform in Pediatrics: Early US Experience

INTRODUCTION

Different robotic systems have been used widely in human surgery since 2000, but pediatric patients require some features that are lacking in the most frequently used robotic systems.

HYPOTHESIS

The Senhance^® robotic system is a safe and an effective device for use in infants and children that has some advantages over other robotic systems.

METHODS

All patients between 0 and 18 years of age whose surgery was amenable to laparoscopy were offered enrollment in this IRB-approved study. We assessed the feasibility, ease and safety of using this robotic platform in pediatric patients including: set-up time, operative time, conversions, complications and outcomes.

RESULTS

Eight patients, ranging from 4 months to 17 years of age and weighing between 8 and 130 kg underwent a variety of procedures including: cholecystectomy (3), inguinal herniorrhaphy (3), orchidopexy for undescended testes (1) and exploration for a suspected enteric duplication cyst (1). All robotic procedures were successfully performed. The 4-month-old (mo), 8 kg patient underwent an uneventful robotic exploration in an attempt to locate a cyst that was hidden in the mesentery at the junction of the terminal ileum and cecum, but ultimately the patient required an anticipated laparotomy to palpate the cyst definitively and to excise it completely. There was no blood loss and no complications. Robotic manipulation with the reusable 3 mm instruments proved successful in all cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Our initial experience with the Senhance^® robotic platform suggests that this is a safe and effective device for pediatric surgery that is easy to use, and which warrants continued evaluation. Most importantly, there appears to be no lower age or weight restrictions to its use.