Endometrial Cancer Surgery Costs: Robot vs Laparoscopy

Surgical Treatment for Endometrial Cancer, Hysterectomy Performed via Minimally Invasive Routes Compared with Open Surgery: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background: Total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy via minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has emerged as the standard of care for early-stage endometrial cancer (EC). Prior systematic reviews and meta-analyses have focused on outcomes reported solely from randomised controlled trials (RCTs), overlooking valuable data from non-randomised studies. This inaugural systematic review and network meta-analysis comprehensively compares clinical and oncological outcomes between MIS and open surgery for early-stage EC, incorporating evidence from randomised and non-randomised studies. Methods: This study was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020186959). All original research of any experimental design reporting clinical and oncological outcomes of surgical treatment for endometrial cancer was included. Study selection was restricted to English-language peer-reviewed journal articles published 1 January 1995-31 December 2021. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted. Results: A total of 99 studies were included in the network meta-analysis, comprising 181,716 women and 14 outcomes. Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgery demonstrated reduced blood loss and length of hospital stay but increased operating time. Compared with laparoscopic surgery, robotic-assisted surgery was associated with a significant reduction in ileus (OR = 0.40, 95% CrI: 0.17-0.87) and total intra-operative complications (OR = 0.38, 95% CrI: 0.17-0.75) as well as a higher disease-free survival (OR = 2.45, 95% CrI: 1.04-6.34). Conclusions: For treating early endometrial cancer, minimal-access surgery via robotic-assisted or laparoscopic techniques appears safer and more efficacious than open surgery. Robotic-assisted surgery is associated with fewer complications and favourable oncological outcomes.

The Role of Robotic Visceral Surgery in Patients with Adhesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abdominal adhesions are a risk factor for conversion to open surgery. An advantage of robotic surgery is the lower rate of unplanned conversions. A systematic review was conducted using the terms “laparoscopic” and “robotic”. Inclusion criteria were: comparative studies evaluating patients undergoing laparoscopic and robotic surgery; reporting data on conversion to open surgery for each group due to adhesions and studies including at least five patients in each group. The main outcomes were the conversion rates due to adhesions and surgeons’ expertise (novice vs. expert). The meta-analysis included 70 studies from different surgical specialities with 14,329 procedures (6472 robotic and 7857 laparoscopic). The robotic approach was associated with a reduced risk of conversion (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.12–2.10, p = 0.007). The analysis of the procedures performed by “expert surgeons” showed a statistically significant difference in favour of robotic surgery (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.03–2.12, p = 0.03). A reduced conversion rate due to adhesions with the robotic approach was observed in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.20–5.72, p = 0.02). The robotic approach could be a valid option in patients with abdominal adhesions, especially in the subgroup of those undergoing colorectal cancer resection performed by expert surgeons.

Laparotomic versus robotic surgery in elderly patients with endometrial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Although robotics has been shown to improve outcomes in some high‐difficulty surgical category patients, it is unclear if such an approach may improve outcomes in elderly patients with endometrial carcinoma (EC).

Objective

To compare robotic and laparotomic surgery in the treatment and staging of elderly EC patients.

Materials and methods

A systematic review and meta‐analysis was performed assessing the risk of overall, intra‐operative, and peri‐operative complications associated with the surgical approach (laparotomic vs robotic) for elderly patients with EC by relative risk (RR). Pooled means ± standard deviation of length of stay were compared with the unpaired t test. Subgroup analyses for overall complications were performed based on different age cut‐offs (>70, >65, and >75 years) and severity of complications (minor and major). A value of P less than 0.05 was considered significant.

Results

Five studies with 7629 EC patients were included. Pooled RR for robotic compared with laparotomic surgery was 0.40 (P < 0.001) for overall, 0.46 (P = 0.18) for intra‐operative, and 0.43 (P < 0.001) for peri‐operative complications. Pooled difference between means ± standard deviation of length of stay for robotic versus laparotomic surgery was −3.34 (P < 0.001). At subgroup analyses, pooled RR of overall complications for robotic surgery versus laparotomic surgery was 0.34 (P < 0.001) in the >70 years, 0.51 (P < 0.01) in the >65 years, 0.20 (P = 0.12) in the >75 years groups. Pooled RR was 0.50 (P = 0.1) in the minor complications subgroup, and 0.42 (P = 0.002) in the major complications subgroup.

Conclusion

Robotics might be a viable alternative to the laparotomic approach for EC in elderly patients because it significantly decreases the risk of overall and peri‐operative complications (mainly major complications), and the length of stay when compared with laparotomy. The decrease in risk of overall complications is greater with increasing patient age.

Economic evaluation of different routes of surgery for the management of endometrial cancer: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

The benefits of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for endometrial carcinoma (EC) are well established although the financial impact of robotic-assisted hysterectomy (RH) compared with laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) is disputed.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

English National Health Service hospitals 2011-2017/2018.

PARTICIPANTS

35 304 women having a hysterectomy for EC identified from Hospital Episode Statistics.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the association between route of surgery on cost at intervention, 30, 90 and 365 days for women undergoing an open hysterectomy (OH) or MIS (LH/RH) for EC in England. The average marginal effect was calculated to compare RH versus OH and RH versus LH which adjusted for any differences in the characteristics of the surgical approaches. Secondary outcomes were to analyse costing data for each surgical approach by age, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and hospital MIS rate classification.

RESULTS

A total of 35 304 procedures were performed, 20 405 (57.8%) were MIS (LH: 18 604 and RH: 1801), 14 291 (40.5%) OH. Mean cost for LH was significantly less than RH, whereas RH was significantly less than OH at intervention, 30, 90 and 365 days (p<0.001). Over time, patients who underwent RH had increasing CCI scores and by the 2015/2016 year had a higher average CCI than LH. Comparing the cost of LH and RH against CCI score identified that the costs closely reflected the patients' CCI. Increasing disparity was also seen between the MIS and OH costs with rising age. When exploring the association between provider volume, MIS rate and surgical costs, there was an association with the higher the MIS rate the lower the average cost.

CONCLUSIONS

Further research is needed to investigate costs in matched patient cohorts to determine the optimum surgical modality in different populations.

A systematic review about costing methodology in robotic surgery: evidence for low quality in most of the studies

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this review was to evaluate the methodological design in studies reporting resource use and costs related to robotic surgery in gynecology.

METHODS

Systematic searches were performed in the databases PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination database for relevant studies before May 2016. The quality of the methodological design was assessed with items regarding methodology from the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). The systematic review was reported according to the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Thirty-two relevant studies were included. None of the reviewed studied fully complied with the CHEERS methodological checklist. Background and objectives, Target population and subgroups and Setting and location were covered in sufficient details in all studies whereas the Study perspective, Justification of the time horizon, Discount rate, and Estimating resources and costs were covered in less than 50%. Most of the studies (29/32) used the health care sector perspective whereas the societal perspective was applied in three studies. The time horizon was stated in 18/32 of the studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The methodological quality of studies evaluating costs of robotic surgery was low. The longest follow-up was 4 months and in general, the use of detailed cost data were lacking in most of the investigations. Key determinants, such as purchasing, maintenance costs of the robotic platform, and the use of surgical equipment, were rarely reported. If health care cost analyses lack transparency regarding cost drivers included it may not provide a true foundation for decision-making.

A comparison of operative outcomes between standard and robotic laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Evidence has been systematically assessed comparing robotic with standard laparoscopy for treatment of endometrial cancer.

METHODS

A search of Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases was performed until 30th October 2016.

RESULTS

Thirty-six papers including 33 retrospective studies, two matched case-control studies and one randomized controlled study were used in a meta-analysis. Information from a further seven registry/database studies were assessed descriptively. There were no differences in the duration of surgery but days stay in hospital were shorter in the robotic arm (0.46 days, 95%CI 0.26 to 0.66). A robotic approach had less blood loss (57.74 mL, 95%CI 38.29 to 77.20), less conversions to laparotomy (RR = 0.41, 95%CI 0.29 to 0.59), and less overall complications (RR = 0.82, 95%CI 0.72 to 0.93). A robotic approach had higher costs ($1746.20, 95%CI $63.37 to $3429.03).

CONCLUSION

A robotic approach has favourable clinical outcomes but is more expensive.

The Essential Elements of a Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Hysterectomy

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomies are being performed at higher rates since the da Vinci Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Inc, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) received US Food and Drug Administration approval in 2005 for gynecologic procedures. Despite the technological advancements over traditional laparoscopy, a discrepancy exists between what the literature states and what the benefits are as seen through the eyes of the end-user. There remains a significant learning curve in the adoption of safe and efficient robotic skills. The authors present important considerations when choosing to perform a robotic hysterectomy and a step-by-step technique. The literature on perioperative outcomes is also reviewed.

Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer staging: A meta-analysis

This meta-analysis broadly compared the safety and efficacy of robot-assisted laparoscopy (RAL) with that of conventional laparoscopy (CL) for endometrial cancer staging. The advantages of RAL were evaluated through the outcomes in terms of conversion rates, complications, length of operation, blood loss, number of lymph nodes harvested, and length of hospitalization. Three electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, and EmBASE) were searched to identify eligible studies. We selected all retrospective studies documenting a comparison between RAL and CL for endometrial cancer staging between 2005 and 2015, and tallied with meta-analyses criteria. Only studies published in English were included in this analysis. The outcomes of the extracted data were pooled and estimated by the Review Manager version 5.1 software. Seventeen studies met the eligibility criteria. Among the 2105 patients reported, 912 underwent RAL and the other 1193 underwent CL for endometrial cancer staging. Compared with CL, RAL had lower conversion rates [risk ratio, 0.4; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.25-0.64; p = 0.0002]. Its complications were also less than that of CL (risk ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.56-0.94; p = 0.02). RAL was associated with significantly less intraoperative blood loss (weighted mean difference, -79.2 mL; 95% CI, from -103.43 to -54.97; p < 0.00001) and a shorter length of hospitalization (weighted mean difference, -0.37 days; 95% CI, from -0.57 to -0.17; p = 0.0003). We found no significant differences in the length of operation and number of lymph nodes harvested between the two groups. From our meta-analysis results, RAL is a safe and effective alternative to CL for endometrial cancer staging. Further studies are required to determine potential advantages or disadvantages of RAL.

Robot-assisted Surgery in Gynecologic Cancers

Robotic-assisted surgery is a technological advancement that facilitates the application of minimally invasive techniques for complex operations in gynecologic oncology. The objective of this article was to review the literature regarding the role of robotic-assisted surgery to treat women with gynecologic cancers. The majority of publications on robotic surgery are still retrospective or descriptive in nature; however, the data for managing patients with a robotic-assisted approach show comparable, and at times improved, outcomes compared with both laparoscopy (2-dimensional) and laparotomy approaches. Robotic-assisted surgery has been used for patients with endometrial cancer and resulted in the increased use of minimally invasive surgery with improved outcomes compared with laparotomy and partially with laparoscopy. This has been shown in large cohorts of patients as well as in obese patients in whom the complication rates have significantly decreased. For early cervical cancer, robotic radical hysterectomy seems to be safe and feasible and to be preferable to laparotomy with seemingly comparable oncologic outcomes. Robotic-assisted surgery and conventional laparoscopy to stage women with early-stage ovarian cancer seem to have similar surgical and oncologic outcomes, with a shorter learning curve for robotic-assisted surgery. However, robotic-assisted surgery appears to be more expensive than laparotomy and traditional laparoscopy. In conclusion, robotic-assisted surgery appears to facilitate the surgical approach for complex operations to treat women with gynecologic cancers. Although randomized controlled trials are lacking to further elucidate the equivalence of robot-assisted surgery with conventional methods in terms of oncologic outcome and patients' quality of life, the technology appears to be safe and effective and could offer a minimally invasive approach to a much larger group of patients.

Bowel injury in robotic gynecologic surgery: risk factors and management options. A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

We sought to analyze the published literature on bowel injuries in patients undergoing gynecologic robotic surgery with the aim to determine its incidence, predisposing factors, and treatment options.

DATA SOURCES

Studies included in this analysis were identified by searching PubMed Central, OVID Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. References for all studies were also reviewed. Time frame for data analysis spanned from November 2001 through December 2014.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

All English-language studies reporting the incidence of bowel injury or complications during robotic gynecologic surgery were included. Studies with data duplication, not in English, case reports, or studies that did not explicitly define bowel injury incidence were excluded.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

The Guidelines for Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews of Observational Studies were used to complete the systematic review with the exception of scoring study quality and a single primary reviewer.

RESULTS

In all, 370 full-text articles were reviewed and 144 met the inclusion criteria. There were 84 bowel injuries recorded in 13,444 patients for an incidence of 1 in 160 (0.62%; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.76%). There were no significant differences in incidence of bowel injury by procedure type. The anatomic location of injury, etiology, and management were rarely reported. Of the bowel injuries, 87% were recognized intraoperatively and the majority (58%) managed via a minimally invasive approach. Of 13,444 patients, 3 (0.02%) (95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.07%) died in the immediate postoperative period and no deaths were a result of a bowel injury.

CONCLUSION

The overall incidence of bowel injury in robotic-assisted gynecologic surgery is 1 in 160. When the location of bowel injuries were specified, they most commonly occurred in the colon and rectum and most were managed via a minimally invasive approach.

Health Care Disparities in Hysterectomy for Gynecologic Cancers: Data From the 2012 National Inpatient Sample

OBJECTIVE

To examine hysterectomies in the United States performed for gynecologic malignancies and identify factors associated with the use of minimally invasive techniques.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional analysis of the 2012 National Inpatient Sample, the largest national all-payer database of hospital discharges. International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification codes for any type of hysterectomy performed for gynecologic malignancy were used to abstract pertinent observations. Weighted multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine the associations between demographic and clinical factors and mode of hysterectomy by cancer diagnosis.

RESULTS

In 2012, there were an estimated 46,450 hysterectomies for gynecologic malignancy in the United States. Of these, 28,285 (61%) were performed for uterine, 4,275 (9%) for cervical, 12,370 (27%) for ovarian cancer, and 1,520 (3%) for other gynecologic malignancies. Minimally invasive hysterectomy was used in 50% of uterine, 43% of cervical, and 8.5% of ovarian cancer cases. Black women had decreased odds of undergoing minimally invasive hysterectomy for uterine (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40-0.0.63, P<.001) and cervical (adjusted OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33-0.96, P=.03) cancers. Those without insurance or with Medicaid had decreased odds of undergoing minimally invasive hysterectomy (P<.001) for uterine cancer. As compared with the Northeast, patients in the South (adjusted OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.53-0.98, P=.04) were less likely to undergo minimally invasive hysterectomy for uterine cancer, whereas those in the West more likely (adjusted OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.10-1.99, P=.009).

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive hysterectomy for gynecologic malignancies remained underused in 2012; there were striking racial disparities associated with use of minimally invasive hysterectomy for uterine and cervical cancers.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Cost assessment of robotics in gynecologic surgery: a systematic review

AIM

The application of robotics is an innovation in the field of gynecologic surgery. Our objective was to evaluate the currently available literature on the cost assessment of robotic surgery of various operations in the field of gynecologic surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

PubMed and Scopus databases were systematically searched in order to retrieve the included studies in our review.

RESULTS

We retrieved 23 studies on a variety of gynecologic operations. The mean cost for robotic, open and laparoscopic surgery ranged from 1731 to 48,769, 894 to 20,277 and 411 to 41,836 Euros, respectively. Operative charges, in hysterectomy, for robotic, open and laparoscopic technique ranged from 936 to 33,920, 684 to 25,616 and 858 to 25,578 Euros, respectively. In sacrocolpopexy, these costs ranged from 2067 to 7275, 2904 to 69,792 and 1482 to 2000 Euros, respectively. Non-operative charges ranged from 467 to 39,121 Euros. The mean total costs for myomectomy ranged from 27,342 to 42,497 and 13,709 to 20,277 Euros, respectively, for the robotic and open methods, while the mean total cost of the laparoscopic technique was 26,181 Euros. Conversions to laparotomy were present in 79/36,185 (0.2%) cases of laparoscopic surgery and in 21/3345 (0.62%) cases of robotic technique. Duration of robotic, open and laparoscopic surgery ranged from 50 to 445, 83.7 to 701 and 74 to 330 min, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery has the potential to become cost-effective in centers with many patients while industry competition could reduce the cost of the robotic instrumentation, making robotic technology more affordable and cost-effective.

A systematic review and cost analysis of robot-assisted hysterectomy in malignant and benign conditions

In order to assess the effectiveness and costs of robot-assisted hysterectomy compared with conventional techniques we reviewed the literature separately for benign and malignant conditions, and conducted a cost analysis for different techniques of hysterectomy from a hospital economic database. Unlimited systematic literature search of Medline, Cochrane and CRD databases produced only two randomized trials, both for benign conditions. For the outcome assessment, data from two HTA reports, one systematic review, and 16 original articles were extracted and analyzed. Furthermore, one cost modelling and 13 original cost studies were analyzed. In malignant conditions, less blood loss, fewer complications and a shorter hospital stay were considered as the main advantages of robot-assisted surgery, like any mini-invasive technique when compared to open surgery. There were no significant differences between the techniques regarding oncological outcomes. When compared to laparoscopic hysterectomy, the main benefit of robot-assistance was a shorter learning curve associated with fewer conversions but the length of robotic operation was often longer. In benign conditions, no clinically significant differences were reported and vaginal hysterectomy was considered the optimal choice when feasible. According to Finnish data, the costs of robot-assisted hysterectomies were 1.5-3 times higher than the costs of conventional techniques. In benign conditions the difference in cost was highest. Because of expensive disposable supplies, unit costs were high regardless of the annual number of robotic operations. Hence, in the current distribution of cost pattern, economical effectiveness cannot be markedly improved by increasing the volume of robotic surgery.

Comparison of perioperative outcomes and cost between robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopy for transperitoneal infrarenal para-aortic lymphadenectomy (TIPAL)

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare perioperative outcomes and cost of robotic-assisted and laparoscopic transperitoneal infrarenal para-aortic lymphadenectomy (TIPAL) for treatment of gynecologic malignant conditions.

DESIGN

Prospective non-randomized study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).

SETTING

Tertiary center for women's health.

PATIENTS

Sixty-two patients with gynecologic cancer operated on by the same surgical team.

INTERVENTIONS

Thirty-two patients underwent TIPAL via robotic-assisted laparoscopy, and 30 via conventional laparoscopy. Comparison analyses of perioperative outcomes and estimated costs were performed.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

There were no differences between robotic-assisted and laparoscopy insofar as age, body mass index, presurgical morbidity, operating time (92.5 minutes for robotics vs 96.6 minutes for laparoscopy), number of aortic nodes (12 vs. 12), hospitalization stay (2 vs. 2 days), or rate of complications (12.5% vs. 13.3%). Blood loss tended to be lower in the robotic group (75.0 vs. 92.5 mL; p = .08). Surgical cost was higher in the robotic group ($3.42 vs. $2.55; p < .001), although hospitalization cost was similar.

CONCLUSION

Robotic-assisted and laparoscopy provide similar perioperative outcomes. However, the robotic-assisted approach is associated with higher surgical cost.

Robotic-assisted transabdominal cerclage (RoboTAC) in the non-pregnant patient

The use of cerclage, either through vaginal or abdominal routes, to assist in delaying pre-term delivery among select women with cervical insufficiency may be beneficial, but can also carry significant morbidity. Robotic-assisted transabdominal cervical cerclage (RoboTAC) in the non-pregnant patient has the ability to not only reduce associated morbidity, but also offer the same benefits as the more traditional laparotomy and laparoscopic approaches, while removing the risk to an in situ fetus. We report the use of robotic-assisted transabdominal cervical cerclage in 24 non-pregnant women. Feasibility of the procedure is discussed along with a description of the technical surgical details. In addition, limited pregnancy outcomes are presented. Our results suggest that RoboTAC is a safe alternative to the traditional laparotomy procedure with quicker recovery time.

Integration of robotics into two established programs of minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer appears to decrease surgical complications

Objective

To compare peri- and postoperative outcomes and complications of laparoscopic vs. robotic-assisted surgical staging for women with endometrial cancer at two established academic institutions.

Methods

Retrospective chart review of all women that underwent total hysterectomy with pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy by robotic-assisted or laparoscopic approach over a four-year period by three surgeons at two academic institutions. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were measured. Secondary outcomes included operative time, blood loss, transfusion rate, number of lymph nodes retrieved, length of hospital stay and need for re-operation or re-admission.

Results

Four hundred and thirty-two cases were identified: 187 patients with robotic-assisted and 245 with laparoscopic staging. Both groups were statistically comparable in baseline characteristics. The overall rate of intraoperative complications was similar in both groups (1.6% vs. 2.9%, p=0.525) but the rate of urinary tract injuries was statistically higher in the laparoscopic group (2.9% vs. 0%, p=0.020). Patients in the robotic group had shorter hospital stay (1.96 days vs. 2.45 days, p=0.016) but an average 57 minutes longer surgery than the laparoscopic group (218 vs. 161 minutes, p=0.0001). There was less conversion rate (0.5% vs. 4.1%; relative risk, 0.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.03 to 1.34; p=0.027) and estimated blood loss in the robotic than in the laparoscopic group (187 mL vs. 110 mL, p=0.0001). There were no significant differences in blood transfusion rate, number of lymph nodes retrieved, re-operation or re-admission between the two groups.

Conclusion

Robotic-assisted surgery is an acceptable alternative to laparoscopy for staging of endometrial cancer and, in selected patients, it appears to have lower risk of urinary tract injury.

Robot-assisted hysterectomy compared to open and laparoscopic approaches: systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To review the safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted hysterectomy compared to traditional open and conventional laparoscopic surgery, differentiating radical, simple total with node staging, and simple total hysterectomy.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, the Cochrane library, and the Journal of Robotic Surgery were searched for controlled trials and observational studies with historic or concurrent controls. Data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Compared to open surgery, robot-assisted radical hysterectomy is associated with reduced hospital stay and blood transfusions. For simple total hysterectomy with node staging, robot-assisted surgery is associated with reduced hospital stay, complications, and blood transfusions compared to open surgery. Compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery, robot-assisted simple total hysterectomy with node staging is associated with complications and conversions.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to open surgery, robot-assisted hysterectomy offers benefits for reduced length of hospital stay and blood transfusions. The best evidence of improved outcomes is for simple total hysterectomy with node staging. Study quality was poor.

Advances in surgical care

The numerous advances in the surgical care of gynecologic oncology patients are allowing clinicians to offer improved quality of life while maintaining excellent cancer outcomes. Advances in technology and disease understanding will only enhance our surgical abilities beyond what can be imagined today. Surgeons have a responsibility to evaluate new technology critically and incorporate the technology into patient care safely and efficiently.

Abdominal Colpopexy: Comparison of Endoscopic Surgical Strategies (ACCESS)

INTRODUCTION

Robotic assistance during laparoscopic surgery for pelvic organ prolapse rapidly disseminated across the United States without level I data to support its benefit over traditional open and laparoscopic approaches [1]. This manuscript describes design and methodology of the Abdominal Colpopexy: Comparison of Endoscopic Surgical Strategies (ACCESS) Trial.

METHODS

ACCESS is a randomized comparative effectiveness trial enrolling patients at two academic teaching facilities, UCLA (Los Angeles, CA) and Loyola University (Chicago, IL). The primary aim is to compare costs of robotic assisted versus pure laparoscopic abdominal sacrocolpopexy (RASC vs LASC). Following a clinical decision for minimally-invasive abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) and research consent, participants with symptomatic stage≥II pelvic organ prolapse are randomized to LASC or RASC on the day of surgery. Costs of care are based on each patient's billing record and equipment costs at each hospital. All costs associated with surgical procedure including costs for robot and initial hospitalization and any re-hospitalization in the first 6weeks are compared between groups. Secondary outcomes include post-operative pain, anatomic outcomes, symptom severity and quality of life, and adverse events. Power calculation determined that 32 women in each arm would provide 95% power to detect a $2500 difference in total charges, using a two-sided two sample t-test with a significance level of 0.05.

RESULTS

Enrollment was completed in May 2011. The 12-month follow-up was completed in May 2012.

CONCLUSIONS

This is a multi-center study to assess cost as a primary outcome in a comparative effectiveness trial of LASC versus RASC.

Contemporary management of endometrial cancer

The treatment of endometrial cancer has changed substantially in the past decade with the introduction of a new staging system and surgical approaches accompanied by novel adjuvant therapies. Primary surgical treatment is the mainstay of therapy but the effectiveness and extent of lymphadenectomy has been challenged, and its acceptance as a routine procedure varies by country. The role of radiation has evolved and chemotherapy has been incorporated, either alone or combined with radiation, to treat the many patients in whom cancer recurs because of a tumour outside the originally radiated pelvic and lower abdominal area. Use of traditional adjuvant chemotherapeutics has been challenged in clinical trials of new agents with improved side-effect profiles. Novel agents and targeted therapies are being investigated. Research into genetic susceptibility to endometrial cancer and the potential genetic aberrations that might translate into therapeutic interventions continues to increase. Substantial global variability in the treatment of endometrial cancer has led to examination of long-accepted norms, which has resulted in rapidly changing standards. International cooperation in clinical trials will hasten progress in treatment of this ubiquitous cancer.

[Study of surplus cost of robotic assistance for radical hysterectomy, versus laparotomy and standard laparoscopy]

OBJECTIVES

The study purpose was to compare the costs among robotic, laparoscopic and open radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-seven patients underwent robotic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer. Cases were performed by three surgeons, at two institutions, and were retrospectively reviewed to perform a cost comparison between all three modalities. We included costs for edible materials in anesthesia and surgery, but costs for staff and indirect financial expenses were excluded. Those data are compared to open and laparoscopic radical hysterectomy data.

RESULTS

The average cost for robotic assistance presented a surplus of 1796 euros compare to laparotomy and 1313 euros compare to standard laparoscopy in 2008, and 1320 and 837 euros respectively.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The average cost for radical hysterectomy was highest for robotic, followed by standard laparoscopy, and least for laparotomy. However, over only 2 years of use, this difference tends to decrease. Medico-economic impact is the main restraint for robotic assistance development, and needs to be assessed permanently.

Understanding the financial impact of robotics in gynecologic surgery

As surgical innovation and technological advancements evolve, the associated costs cannot be overlooked. Currently, the United States health care system is undergoing an attempted overhaul with technology such as robotics sitting front and center of the financial debate. As patient demand for less invasive surgical options increases and standards of practice change, patient outcomes must be carefully evaluated to justify the costs increase from traditional, often more invasive treatments. The collection of financial data is quite varied among hospital systems and so is the models used to determine the costs of robotics. Although limited thus far, various cost data have been ascertained in the areas of reproductive surgery, hysterectomy (both benign and oncologic), and pelvic reconstructive surgery.

Evolution of surgical management of early-stage endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

We sought to examine the evolution of surgical care for early-stage endometrial cancers and factors affecting use of laparoscopy.

STUDY DESIGN

Women with surgically managed early-stage endometrial cancer were divided into 2 groups corresponding to before and after addition of faculty with formal fellowship training in laparoscopic staging and access to a robotic surgery platform.

RESULTS

In all, 502 women were identified. Laparoscopic management increased from 24-69% between time periods (P < .0001). Performance of comprehensive surgical staging, and lymph node counts, increased (P < .0001) despite an increase in median body mass index (P = .001). A traditional "straight stick" technique was performed in 72% of laparoscopic cases during the later period. Laparoscopy patients had lower estimated blood losses and shorter hospital stays (each P < .0001) compared to laparotomy patients.

CONCLUSION

Addition of faculty with formal fellowship training in laparoscopic staging and access to a robotic surgery platform shifted management of early-stage endometrial cancer toward laparoscopy.

Robotic surgery in gynecology: an updated systematic review

The introduction of da Vinci Robotic Surgery to the field of Gynecology has resulted in large changes in surgical management. The robotic platform allows less experienced laparoscopic surgeons to perform more complex procedures. In general gynecology and reproductive gynecology, the robot is being increasingly used for procedures such as hysterectomies, myomectomies, adnexal surgery, and tubal anastomosis. Among urogynecology the robot is being utilized for sacrocolopexies. In the field of gynecologic oncology, the robot is being increasingly used for hysterectomies and lymphadenectomies in oncologic diseases. Despite the rapid and widespread adoption of robotic surgery in gynecology, there are no randomized trials comparing its efficacy and safety to other traditional surgical approaches. Our aim is to update previously published reviews with a focus on only comparative observational studies. We determined that, with the right amount of training and skill, along with appropriate patient selection, robotic surgery can be highly advantageous. Patients will likely have less blood loss, less post-operative pain, faster recoveries, and fewer complications compared to open surgery and potentially even laparoscopy. However, until larger, well-designed observational studies or randomized control trials are completed which report long-term outcomes, we cannot definitively state the superiority of robotic surgery over other surgical methods.

An economic analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: costs, charges and reimbursements to hospitals and professionals

OBJECTIVE

To determine the actual costs, charges, and reimbursements associated with robotic vs. laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer.

METHODS

Data were collected from hospital billing records, MD professional group billing records, tumor registry, and medical records on operations performed by a single surgeon from one institution between 2008 and 2010. For comparison, surgical groups were matched based on age, histology, and stage of disease over the same time period.

RESULTS

Of 54 patients, 27 underwent robotic surgery (RS) and 27 had laparoscopic surgery (LS). The median age was 57 years. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups based on age, stage, and histology. The hospital charges for RS were higher at $64,266 vs. $55,130 for LS (p=0.036). However, the reimbursement to the hospital was not statistically different at $13,003 for RS and $10,245 for LS (p=0.29). Operating suite, room and board, anesthesia, post anesthesia care unit, and pathology accounted for over 90% of hospital charges. The surgeon charges for RS and LS were $6824 and $6327, respectively (p=0.033) and the anesthesiologist charges were $4049 and $2985, respectively (p=0.001). However, there were no differences in reimbursement to the surgeon (p=0.74) and anesthesiologist (p=0.84) between the two operative approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data showed that the direct costs and charges associated with robotic surgery were higher compared to laparoscopic surgery. However, actual reimbursements to the hospital, surgeon, and anesthesiologist were not significantly different between the two surgical approaches.

The Feasibility of Societal Cost Equivalence between Robotic Hysterectomy and Alternate Hysterectomy Methods for Endometrial Cancer

Objectives. We assess whether it is feasible for robotic hysterectomy for endometrial cancer to be less expensive to society than traditional laparoscopic hysterectomy or abdominal hysterectomy. Methods. We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of patient characteristics, operative times, complications, and hospital charges from all (n = 234) endometrial cancer patients who underwent hysterectomy in 2009 at our hospital. Per patient costs of each hysterectomy method were examined from the societal perspective. Sensitivity analysis and Monte Carlo simulation were performed using a cost-minimization model. Results. 40 (17.1%) of hysterectomies for endometrial cancer were robotic, 91 (38.9%), were abdominal, and 103 (44.0%) were laparoscopic. 96.3% of the variation in operative cost between patients was predicted by operative time (R = 0.963, P < 0.01). Mean operative time for robotic hysterectomy was significantly longer than other methods (P < 0.01). Abdominal hysterectomy was consistently the most expensive while the traditional laparoscopic approach was consistently least expensive. The threshold in operative time that makes robotic hysterectomy cost equivalent to the abdominal approach is within the range of our experience. Conclusion. It is feasible for robotic hysterectomy to be less expensive than abdominal hysterectomy, but unlikely for robotic hysterectomy to be less expensive than traditional laparoscopy.

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic management of ureteral endometriosis

This report describes 2 cases of ureteral obstruction secondary to endometriosis managed with robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial ureterectomy and ureteroneocystostomy.

Endometriosis is the leading cause of female pelvic pain and infertility and affects approximately 10% of women. Lesions involve the urinary tract in up to 6% of cases with ureteral involvement in a smaller subset of .08% to 1%. Multiple authors describe open and laparoscopic approaches to management of ureteral endometriosis; howeve, this report describes 2 cases of ureteral obstruction secondary to endometriosis managed with robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial ureterectomy and ureteroneocystostomy.

Minimally invasive surgical approaches for patients with endometrial cancer

Over the past 10 years, multiple studies have shown that minimally invasive surgical approaches for the treatment of endometrial cancer reduce blood loss, length of hospital stay, and the incidence and severity of surgical complications compared with laparotomy. In addition, minimally invasive approaches result in better cosmesis and short-term patient quality of life. Although data from prospective studies have yet to mature, laparoscopic and open surgeries seem to be equivalent oncologically. In this article, we will review the current literature on traditional laparoscopy, robotically assisted laparoscopy, and single-port laparoscopy as surgical approaches for the treatment of endometrial cancer.

The technique of robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery in gynaecology, its introduction into the clinical routine of a gynaecological department and the analysis of the perioperative courses - a German experience

OBJECTIVE

Robotic assisted surgery is an advancement on conventional laparoscopy. The first and single FDA-approved device is the da-Vinci™ system, which provides means to overcome the limitations of conventional laparoscopy. In Germany the use of the robotic system in gynaecology is at the threshold of a promising development. There is a wide spectrum of indications, such as simple and radical hysterectomies, including pelvic and paraaortic lymph node dissection. The introduction of the robotic system into the clinical routine is demonstrated.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Robotic assisted laparoscopic interventions have been performed in the reporting hospital since April 2008. In the course of treatment of 172 cases, an increasing rise of complexity of surgical procedure has been achieved. The daVinci™ system is well adaptable in clinical routine. Hitherto, the clinical outcome has been favourable, higher-grade specific complications occurred very rarely. The short time advantages are a decrease of postoperative length of stay, a reduction of postinterventional need of analgetics and an overall accelerated period of recovery has been demonstrated compared to conventional abdominal procedures. It also shows that a drastic decrease of open conventional abdominal procedures concerning uterine pathologies appeared in the reporting department.

RESULTS

Perioperative advantages of robotic assisted laparoscopic interventions are, above all, the decrease of morbidity (concerning blood loss, need of analgetics, length of stay, etc.). Surgical advantages are the more complex applicability, improved precision, dexterity and vision (3D), a greater autonomy of the surgeon, a smaller learning curve and an increase of preparation consistent with the anatomical structures. In contrast, disadvantages concern an initial greater time investment, the potentially different management of complications, the limited applicability in multiquadrant surgery and the difficulty regarding cost coverage respective to recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, robotic assisted minimal invasive surgery has an enormous potential in gynaecology; by simplifying the essential surgical procedure. The advantages of this technique will be approachability for a majority of gynaecological patients. The feasibility of a multitude of gynaecological surgical interventions has already been approved partially in a small number of cases. The upcoming challenge now is to verify the short and long term advantages of robotic surgery in prospective trials, especially concerning gynaecological oncology.