Skip to main content
Top
Published in: World Journal of Surgery 12/2013

01-12-2013

Robotic-assisted Colorectal Surgery in the United States: A Nationwide Analysis of Trends and Outcomes

Authors: Wissam J. Halabi, Celeste Y. Kang, Mehraneh D. Jafari, Vinh Q. Nguyen, Joseph C. Carmichael, Steven Mills, Michael J. Stamos, Alessio Pigazzi

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 12/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

While robotic-assisted colorectal surgery (RACS) is becoming increasingly popular, data comparing its outcomes to other established techniques remain limited to small case series. Moreover, there are no large studies evaluating the trends of RACS at the national level.

Methods

The Nationwide Inpatient Sample 2009–2010 was retrospectively reviewed for robotic-assisted and laparoscopic colorectal procedures performed for cancer, benign polyps, and diverticular disease. Trends in different settings, indications, and demographics were analyzed. Multivariate regression analysis was used to compare selected outcomes between RACS and conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS).

Results

An estimated 128,288 colorectal procedures were performed through minimally invasive techniques over the study period, and RACS was used in 2.78 % of cases. From 2009 to 2010, the use of robotics increased in all hospital settings but was still more common in large, urban, and teaching hospitals. Rectal cancer was the most common indication for RACS, with a tendency toward its selective use in male patients. On multivariate analysis, robotic surgery was associated with higher hospital charges in colonic ($11,601.39; 95 % CI 6,921.82–16,280.97) and rectal cases ($12,964.90; 95 % CI 6,534.79–19,395.01), and higher rates of postoperative bleeding in colonic cases (OR = 2.15; 95 % CI 1.27– 3.65). RACS was similar to CLS with respect to length of hospital stay, morbidity, anastomotic leak, and ileus. Conversion to open surgery was significantly lower in robotic colonic and rectal procedures (0.41; 95 % CI 0.25–0.67) and (0.10; 95 % CI 0.06–0.16), respectively.

Conclusions

The use of RACS is still limited in the United States. However, its use increased over the study period despite higher associated charges and no real advantages over laparoscopy in terms of outcome. The one advantage is lower conversion rates.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Ballantyne GH (2002) Robotic surgery, telerobotic surgery, telepresence, and telementoring. Review of early clinical results. Surg Endosc 16:1389–1402PubMedCrossRef Ballantyne GH (2002) Robotic surgery, telerobotic surgery, telepresence, and telementoring. Review of early clinical results. Surg Endosc 16:1389–1402PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Ewing DR, Pigazzi A, Wang Y et al (2004) Robots in the operating room—the history. Semin Laparosc Surg 11:63–71PubMed Ewing DR, Pigazzi A, Wang Y et al (2004) Robots in the operating room—the history. Semin Laparosc Surg 11:63–71PubMed
3.
go back to reference Barry MJ, Gallagher PM, Skinner JS et al (2012) Adverse effects of robotic-assisted laparoscopic versus open retropubic radical prostatectomy among a nationwide random sample of Medicare-age men. J Clin Oncol 30:513–518PubMedCrossRef Barry MJ, Gallagher PM, Skinner JS et al (2012) Adverse effects of robotic-assisted laparoscopic versus open retropubic radical prostatectomy among a nationwide random sample of Medicare-age men. J Clin Oncol 30:513–518PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Novara G, Ficarra V, Rosen RC et al (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62:431–452PubMedCrossRef Novara G, Ficarra V, Rosen RC et al (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62:431–452PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Novara G, Ficarra V, Mocellin S et al (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting oncologic outcome after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62:382–404PubMedCrossRef Novara G, Ficarra V, Mocellin S et al (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting oncologic outcome after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62:382–404PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Lowrance WT, Eastham JA, Savage C et al (2012) Contemporary open and robotic radical prostatectomy practice patterns among urologists in the United States. J Urol 187:2087–2093PubMedCrossRef Lowrance WT, Eastham JA, Savage C et al (2012) Contemporary open and robotic radical prostatectomy practice patterns among urologists in the United States. J Urol 187:2087–2093PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Lowery WJ, Leath CA 3rd, Robinson RD (2012) Robotic surgery applications in the management of gynecologic malignancies. J Surg Oncol 105:481–487PubMedCrossRef Lowery WJ, Leath CA 3rd, Robinson RD (2012) Robotic surgery applications in the management of gynecologic malignancies. J Surg Oncol 105:481–487PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Weber PA, Merola S, Wasielewski A et al (2002) Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic right and sigmoid colectomies for benign disease. Dis Colon Rectum 45:1689–1694 discussion 1695–1686PubMedCrossRef Weber PA, Merola S, Wasielewski A et al (2002) Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic right and sigmoid colectomies for benign disease. Dis Colon Rectum 45:1689–1694 discussion 1695–1686PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Hashizume M, Shimada M, Tomikawa M et al (2002) Early experiences of endoscopic procedures in general surgery assisted by a computer-enhanced surgical system. Surg Endosc 16:1187–1191PubMedCrossRef Hashizume M, Shimada M, Tomikawa M et al (2002) Early experiences of endoscopic procedures in general surgery assisted by a computer-enhanced surgical system. Surg Endosc 16:1187–1191PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Vibert E, Denet C, Gayet B (2003) Major digestive surgery using a remote-controlled robot: the next revolution. Arch Surg 138:1002–1006PubMedCrossRef Vibert E, Denet C, Gayet B (2003) Major digestive surgery using a remote-controlled robot: the next revolution. Arch Surg 138:1002–1006PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Delaney CP, Lynch AC, Senagore AJ et al (2003) Comparison of robotically performed and traditional laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 46:1633–1639PubMedCrossRef Delaney CP, Lynch AC, Senagore AJ et al (2003) Comparison of robotically performed and traditional laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 46:1633–1639PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Anvari M, Birch DW, Bamehriz F et al (2004) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 14:311–315PubMedCrossRef Anvari M, Birch DW, Bamehriz F et al (2004) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 14:311–315PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference D’Annibale A, Morpurgo E, Fiscon V et al (2004) Robotic and laparoscopic surgery for treatment of colorectal diseases. Dis Colon Rectum 47:2162–2168PubMedCrossRef D’Annibale A, Morpurgo E, Fiscon V et al (2004) Robotic and laparoscopic surgery for treatment of colorectal diseases. Dis Colon Rectum 47:2162–2168PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Pigazzi A, Ellenhorn JD, Ballantyne GH et al (2006) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 20:1521–1525PubMedCrossRef Pigazzi A, Ellenhorn JD, Ballantyne GH et al (2006) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 20:1521–1525PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Rawlings AL, Woodland JH, Vegunta RK et al (2007) Robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy. Surg Endosc 21:1701–1708PubMedCrossRef Rawlings AL, Woodland JH, Vegunta RK et al (2007) Robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy. Surg Endosc 21:1701–1708PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Park JS, Choi GS, Lim KH et al (2011) S052: a comparison of robot-assisted, laparoscopic, and open surgery in the treatment of rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 25:240–248PubMedCrossRef Park JS, Choi GS, Lim KH et al (2011) S052: a comparison of robot-assisted, laparoscopic, and open surgery in the treatment of rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 25:240–248PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Patel CB, Ragupathi M, Ramos-Valadez DI et al (2011) A three-arm (laparoscopic, hand-assisted, and robotic) matched-case analysis of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes in minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 54:144–150PubMedCrossRef Patel CB, Ragupathi M, Ramos-Valadez DI et al (2011) A three-arm (laparoscopic, hand-assisted, and robotic) matched-case analysis of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes in minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 54:144–150PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Pigazzi A, Luca F, Patriti A et al (2010) Multicentric study on robotic tumor-specific mesorectal excision for the treatment of rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 17:1614–1620PubMedCrossRef Pigazzi A, Luca F, Patriti A et al (2010) Multicentric study on robotic tumor-specific mesorectal excision for the treatment of rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 17:1614–1620PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Spinoglio G, Summa M, Priora F et al (2008) Robotic colorectal surgery: first 50 cases experience. Dis Colon Rectum 51:1627–1632PubMedCrossRef Spinoglio G, Summa M, Priora F et al (2008) Robotic colorectal surgery: first 50 cases experience. Dis Colon Rectum 51:1627–1632PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Baik SH, Kwon HY, Kim JS et al (2009) Robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal cancer: short-term outcome of a prospective comparative study. Ann Surg Oncol 16:1480–1487PubMedCrossRef Baik SH, Kwon HY, Kim JS et al (2009) Robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal cancer: short-term outcome of a prospective comparative study. Ann Surg Oncol 16:1480–1487PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Bertani E, Chiappa A, Biffi R et al (2011) Assessing appropriateness for elective colorectal cancer surgery: clinical, oncological, and quality-of-life short-term outcomes employing different treatment approaches. Int J Colorectal Dis 26:1317–1327PubMedCrossRef Bertani E, Chiappa A, Biffi R et al (2011) Assessing appropriateness for elective colorectal cancer surgery: clinical, oncological, and quality-of-life short-term outcomes employing different treatment approaches. Int J Colorectal Dis 26:1317–1327PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Park IJ, You YN, Schlette E et al (2012) Reverse-hybrid robotic mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 55:228–233PubMedCrossRef Park IJ, You YN, Schlette E et al (2012) Reverse-hybrid robotic mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 55:228–233PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference deSouza AL, Prasad LM, Marecik SJ et al (2010) Total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: the potential advantage of robotic assistance. Dis Colon Rectum 53:1611–1617PubMedCrossRef deSouza AL, Prasad LM, Marecik SJ et al (2010) Total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: the potential advantage of robotic assistance. Dis Colon Rectum 53:1611–1617PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP)—Nationwide inpatient Sample 2012 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP)—Nationwide inpatient Sample 2012
25.
go back to reference Anderson JE, Chang DC, Parsons JK et al (2012) The first national examination of outcomes and trends in robotic surgery in the United States. J Am Coll Surg 215:107–114 discussion 114–106PubMedCrossRef Anderson JE, Chang DC, Parsons JK et al (2012) The first national examination of outcomes and trends in robotic surgery in the United States. J Am Coll Surg 215:107–114 discussion 114–106PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference van Walraven C, Austin PC, Jennings A et al (2009) A modification of the Elixhauser comorbidity measures into a point system for hospital death using administrative data. Med Care 47:626–633PubMedCrossRef van Walraven C, Austin PC, Jennings A et al (2009) A modification of the Elixhauser comorbidity measures into a point system for hospital death using administrative data. Med Care 47:626–633PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Holm S (1979) A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand J Stat 6:65–70 Holm S (1979) A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand J Stat 6:65–70
28.
go back to reference Ballantyne GH (2002) The pitfalls of laparoscopic surgery: challenges for robotics and telerobotic surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 12:1–5PubMedCrossRef Ballantyne GH (2002) The pitfalls of laparoscopic surgery: challenges for robotics and telerobotic surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 12:1–5PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Wexner SD, Bergamaschi R, Lacy A et al (2009) The current status of robotic pelvic surgery: results of a multinational interdisciplinary consensus conference. Surg Endosc 23:438–443PubMedCrossRef Wexner SD, Bergamaschi R, Lacy A et al (2009) The current status of robotic pelvic surgery: results of a multinational interdisciplinary consensus conference. Surg Endosc 23:438–443PubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference deSouza AL, Prasad LM, Park JJ et al (2010) Robotic assistance in right hemicolectomy: is there a role? Dis Colon Rectum 53:1000–1006PubMedCrossRef deSouza AL, Prasad LM, Park JJ et al (2010) Robotic assistance in right hemicolectomy: is there a role? Dis Colon Rectum 53:1000–1006PubMedCrossRef
31.
go back to reference Ayav A, Bresler L, Brunaud L et al (2004) Early results of one-year robotic surgery using the Da Vinci system to perform advanced laparoscopic procedures. J Gastrointest Surg 8:720–726PubMedCrossRef Ayav A, Bresler L, Brunaud L et al (2004) Early results of one-year robotic surgery using the Da Vinci system to perform advanced laparoscopic procedures. J Gastrointest Surg 8:720–726PubMedCrossRef
32.
go back to reference Park YA, Kim JM, Kim SA et al (2010) Totally robotic surgery for rectal cancer: from splenic flexure to pelvic floor in one setup. Surg Endosc 24:715–720PubMedCrossRef Park YA, Kim JM, Kim SA et al (2010) Totally robotic surgery for rectal cancer: from splenic flexure to pelvic floor in one setup. Surg Endosc 24:715–720PubMedCrossRef
33.
go back to reference Jacobs M, Verdeja JC, Goldstein HS (1991) Minimally invasive colon resection (laparoscopic colectomy). Surg Laparosc Endosc 1:144–150PubMed Jacobs M, Verdeja JC, Goldstein HS (1991) Minimally invasive colon resection (laparoscopic colectomy). Surg Laparosc Endosc 1:144–150PubMed
34.
go back to reference Kemp JA, Finlayson SR (2008) Nationwide trends in laparoscopic colectomy from 2000 to 2004. Surg Endosc 22:1181–1187PubMedCrossRef Kemp JA, Finlayson SR (2008) Nationwide trends in laparoscopic colectomy from 2000 to 2004. Surg Endosc 22:1181–1187PubMedCrossRef
35.
go back to reference Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group (2004) A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med 350:2050–2059CrossRef Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group (2004) A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med 350:2050–2059CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Veldkamp R, Kuhry E, Hop WC et al (2005) Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 6:477–484PubMedCrossRef Veldkamp R, Kuhry E, Hop WC et al (2005) Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 6:477–484PubMedCrossRef
37.
go back to reference Kang CY, Halabi WJ, Luo R et al (2012) Laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a better look into the latest trends. Arch Surg 147:724–731PubMedCrossRef Kang CY, Halabi WJ, Luo R et al (2012) Laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a better look into the latest trends. Arch Surg 147:724–731PubMedCrossRef
38.
go back to reference Park JS, Choi GS, Park SY et al (2012) Randomized clinical trial of robot-assisted versus standard laparoscopic right colectomy. Br J Surg 99:1219–1226PubMedCrossRef Park JS, Choi GS, Park SY et al (2012) Randomized clinical trial of robot-assisted versus standard laparoscopic right colectomy. Br J Surg 99:1219–1226PubMedCrossRef
39.
40.
go back to reference Collinson FJ, Jayne DG, Pigazzi A et al (2012) An international, multicentre, prospective, randomised, controlled, unblinded, parallel-group trial of robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 27:233–241PubMedCrossRef Collinson FJ, Jayne DG, Pigazzi A et al (2012) An international, multicentre, prospective, randomised, controlled, unblinded, parallel-group trial of robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 27:233–241PubMedCrossRef
41.
go back to reference Zapletal C, Woeste G, Bechstein WO et al (2007) Laparoscopic sigmoid resections for diverticulitis complicated by abscesses or fistulas. Int J Colorectal Dis 22:1515–1521PubMedCrossRef Zapletal C, Woeste G, Bechstein WO et al (2007) Laparoscopic sigmoid resections for diverticulitis complicated by abscesses or fistulas. Int J Colorectal Dis 22:1515–1521PubMedCrossRef
42.
go back to reference Ragupathi M, Ramos-Valadez DI, Patel CB et al (2011) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery for recurrent diverticulitis: experience in consecutive cases and a review of the literature. Surg Endosc 25:199–206PubMedCrossRef Ragupathi M, Ramos-Valadez DI, Patel CB et al (2011) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery for recurrent diverticulitis: experience in consecutive cases and a review of the literature. Surg Endosc 25:199–206PubMedCrossRef
43.
go back to reference Maeso S, Reza M, Mayol JA et al (2010) Efficacy of the Da Vinci surgical system in abdominal surgery compared with that of laparoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 252:254–262PubMedCrossRef Maeso S, Reza M, Mayol JA et al (2010) Efficacy of the Da Vinci surgical system in abdominal surgery compared with that of laparoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 252:254–262PubMedCrossRef
44.
go back to reference Patriti A, Ceccarelli G, Bartoli A (2009) Short- and medium-term outcome of robot-assisted and traditional laparoscopic rectal resection. JSLS 13:176–183PubMed Patriti A, Ceccarelli G, Bartoli A (2009) Short- and medium-term outcome of robot-assisted and traditional laparoscopic rectal resection. JSLS 13:176–183PubMed
45.
go back to reference Mirnezami A, Mirnezami R, Chandrakumaran K et al (2011) Increased local recurrence and reduced survival from colorectal cancer following anastomotic leak: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 253:890–899PubMedCrossRef Mirnezami A, Mirnezami R, Chandrakumaran K et al (2011) Increased local recurrence and reduced survival from colorectal cancer following anastomotic leak: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 253:890–899PubMedCrossRef
46.
go back to reference White I, Greenberg R, Itah R et al (2011) Impact of conversion on short and long-term outcome in laparoscopic resection of curable colorectal cancer. JSLS 15:182–187PubMedCrossRef White I, Greenberg R, Itah R et al (2011) Impact of conversion on short and long-term outcome in laparoscopic resection of curable colorectal cancer. JSLS 15:182–187PubMedCrossRef
47.
go back to reference Antoniou SA, Antoniou GA, Koch OO et al (2012) Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery of the colon and rectum. Surg Endosc 26:1–11PubMedCrossRef Antoniou SA, Antoniou GA, Koch OO et al (2012) Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery of the colon and rectum. Surg Endosc 26:1–11PubMedCrossRef
48.
go back to reference deSouza AL, Prasad LM, Ricci J et al (2011) A comparison of open and robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal adenocarcinoma. Dis Colon Rectum 54:275–282PubMedCrossRef deSouza AL, Prasad LM, Ricci J et al (2011) A comparison of open and robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal adenocarcinoma. Dis Colon Rectum 54:275–282PubMedCrossRef
49.
go back to reference Lorence DP, Ibrahim IA (2003) Benchmarking variation in coding accuracy across the United States. J Health Care Finance 29:29–42PubMed Lorence DP, Ibrahim IA (2003) Benchmarking variation in coding accuracy across the United States. J Health Care Finance 29:29–42PubMed
Metadata
Title
Robotic-assisted Colorectal Surgery in the United States: A Nationwide Analysis of Trends and Outcomes
Authors
Wissam J. Halabi
Celeste Y. Kang
Mehraneh D. Jafari
Vinh Q. Nguyen
Joseph C. Carmichael
Steven Mills
Michael J. Stamos
Alessio Pigazzi
Publication date
01-12-2013
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
World Journal of Surgery / Issue 12/2013
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2024-7

Other articles of this Issue 12/2013

World Journal of Surgery 12/2013 Go to the issue