Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Robotic Surgery 2/2020

01-04-2020 | Hysterectomy | Original Article

Direct cost of hysterectomy: comparison of robotic versus other routes

Published in: Journal of Robotic Surgery | Issue 2/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the direct cost of robotic hysterectomy in comparison with abdominal, vaginal, and laparoscopic routes past the initial learning curve. We examined a consecutive case series of 348 patients undergoing abdominal (AH), vaginal (VH), laparoscopic (LH), or robotic hysterectomy (RH) for benign conditions between January 2015 and March 2017. The primary outcome was the direct cost of hysterectomy, while the secondary outcome was length of stay. Multiple linear regression was used to examine the cost and length of stay across the four hysterectomy groups after controlling for potential confounding variables. 19 (5.5%) patients underwent AH, 53 (15.2%) LH, and 59 (16.9%) VH, while 217 (62.4%) RH. VH group was the oldest at age 52.1 years (p < 0.01), whereas AH group had the highest BMI at 35.9 kg/m2 (p = 0.03). While colporrhaphy was most frequently performed in VH (81%), mid-urethral sling was most common in RH (30%) (p < 0.01). The average direct cost was $3865 for RH, $4063 for AH, $2791 for VH, and $3818 for LH. Upon multivariate analysis, RH and VH were $650.47 (p < 0.01) and $883.07 (p < 0.01) cheaper, respectively, compared to AH. The average length of stay was the shortest for RH at 10.7 h, followed by LH at 15.5 h, vaginal at 20 h, and abdominal at 51.5 h (p < 0.01). VH has the lowest direct cost, while AH has the highest. Both VH and RH have a significantly lower cost than that of AH. RH has the shortest hospital stay, whereas AH has the longest.
Literature
2.
go back to reference Wright JD, Ananth CV, Lewin SN, Burke WM, Lu YS, Neugut AI et al (2013) Robotically assisted vs laparoscopic hysterectomy among women with benign gynecologic disease. JAMA 309(7):689–698CrossRef Wright JD, Ananth CV, Lewin SN, Burke WM, Lu YS, Neugut AI et al (2013) Robotically assisted vs laparoscopic hysterectomy among women with benign gynecologic disease. JAMA 309(7):689–698CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Winter ML, Leu SY, Lagrew DC Jr, Bustillo G (2015) Cost comparison of robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus standard laparoscopic hysterectomy. J Robot Surg 9(4):269–275CrossRef Winter ML, Leu SY, Lagrew DC Jr, Bustillo G (2015) Cost comparison of robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus standard laparoscopic hysterectomy. J Robot Surg 9(4):269–275CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Landeen LB, Bell MC, Hubert HB, Bennis LY, Knutsen-Larson SS, Seshadri-Kreaden U (2011) Clinical and cost comparisons for hysterectomy via abdominal, standard laparoscopic, vaginal and robot-assisted approaches. S D Med 64(6):197–199PubMed Landeen LB, Bell MC, Hubert HB, Bennis LY, Knutsen-Larson SS, Seshadri-Kreaden U (2011) Clinical and cost comparisons for hysterectomy via abdominal, standard laparoscopic, vaginal and robot-assisted approaches. S D Med 64(6):197–199PubMed
5.
go back to reference Sarlos D, Kots L, Stevanovic N, Schaer G (2010) Robotic hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: outcome and cost analyses of a matched case–control study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 150(1):92–96CrossRef Sarlos D, Kots L, Stevanovic N, Schaer G (2010) Robotic hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: outcome and cost analyses of a matched case–control study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 150(1):92–96CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Swenson CW, Kamdar NS, Harris JA, Uppal S, Campbell DA Jr, Morgan DM (2016) Comparison of robotic and other minimally invasive routes of hysterectomy for benign indications. Am J Obstet Gynecol 215(5):650CrossRef Swenson CW, Kamdar NS, Harris JA, Uppal S, Campbell DA Jr, Morgan DM (2016) Comparison of robotic and other minimally invasive routes of hysterectomy for benign indications. Am J Obstet Gynecol 215(5):650CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Iavazzo C, Mamais I, Gkegkes ID (2016) Robotic assisted vs laparoscopic and/or open myomectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical evidence. Arch Gynecol Obstet 294(1):5–17CrossRef Iavazzo C, Mamais I, Gkegkes ID (2016) Robotic assisted vs laparoscopic and/or open myomectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical evidence. Arch Gynecol Obstet 294(1):5–17CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Matthews CA, Reid N, Ramakrishnan V, Hull K, Cohen S (2010) Evaluation of the introduction of robotic technology on route of hysterectomy and complications in the first year of use. Am J Obstet Gynecol 203(5):499–500CrossRef Matthews CA, Reid N, Ramakrishnan V, Hull K, Cohen S (2010) Evaluation of the introduction of robotic technology on route of hysterectomy and complications in the first year of use. Am J Obstet Gynecol 203(5):499–500CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Beste TM, Nelson KH, Daucher JA (2005) Total laparoscopic hysterectomy utilizing a robotic surgical system. JSLS 9(1):13–15PubMedPubMedCentral Beste TM, Nelson KH, Daucher JA (2005) Total laparoscopic hysterectomy utilizing a robotic surgical system. JSLS 9(1):13–15PubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Diaz-Arrastia C, Jurnalov C, Gomez G, Townsend C Jr (2002) Laparoscopic hysterectomy using a computer-enhanced surgical robot. Surg Endosc 16(9):1271–1273CrossRef Diaz-Arrastia C, Jurnalov C, Gomez G, Townsend C Jr (2002) Laparoscopic hysterectomy using a computer-enhanced surgical robot. Surg Endosc 16(9):1271–1273CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Fiorentino RP, Zepeda MA, Goldstein BH, John CR, Rettenmaier MA (2006) Pilot study assessing robotic laparoscopic hysterectomy and patient outcomes. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 13(1):60–63CrossRef Fiorentino RP, Zepeda MA, Goldstein BH, John CR, Rettenmaier MA (2006) Pilot study assessing robotic laparoscopic hysterectomy and patient outcomes. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 13(1):60–63CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Woelk JL, Borah BJ, Trabuco EC, Heien HC, Gebhart JB (2014) Cost differences among robotic, vaginal, and abdominal hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol 123(2 Pt 1):255–262CrossRef Woelk JL, Borah BJ, Trabuco EC, Heien HC, Gebhart JB (2014) Cost differences among robotic, vaginal, and abdominal hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol 123(2 Pt 1):255–262CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Wright KN, Jonsdottir GM, Jorgensen S, Shah N, Einarsson JI (2012) Costs and outcomes of abdominal, vaginal, laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomies. JSLS 16(4):519–524CrossRef Wright KN, Jonsdottir GM, Jorgensen S, Shah N, Einarsson JI (2012) Costs and outcomes of abdominal, vaginal, laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomies. JSLS 16(4):519–524CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Geller EJ, Matthews CA (2013) Impact of robotic operative efficiency on profitability. Am J Obstet Gynecol 209(1):20–25CrossRef Geller EJ, Matthews CA (2013) Impact of robotic operative efficiency on profitability. Am J Obstet Gynecol 209(1):20–25CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Avondstondt AM, Wallenstein M, D’Adamo CR, Ehsanipoor RM (2018) Change in cost after 5 years of experience with robotic-assisted hysterectomy for the treatment of endometrial cancer. J Robot Surg 12(1):93–96CrossRef Avondstondt AM, Wallenstein M, D’Adamo CR, Ehsanipoor RM (2018) Change in cost after 5 years of experience with robotic-assisted hysterectomy for the treatment of endometrial cancer. J Robot Surg 12(1):93–96CrossRef
16.
go back to reference (2014) Firm policies and the right procedures tip the cost-benefit balance toward flip rooms. OR Manag 30(4):19–21 (2014) Firm policies and the right procedures tip the cost-benefit balance toward flip rooms. OR Manag 30(4):19–21
17.
go back to reference Bosco UJ, Peters JA, Torrance A (2016) The elephant in the or: improving performance for long surgical cases. Physician Leadersh J 3(3):8–12PubMed Bosco UJ, Peters JA, Torrance A (2016) The elephant in the or: improving performance for long surgical cases. Physician Leadersh J 3(3):8–12PubMed
18.
go back to reference Childers CP, Maggard-Gibbons M (2018) Understanding costs of care in the operating room. JAMA Surg 153(4):e176233CrossRef Childers CP, Maggard-Gibbons M (2018) Understanding costs of care in the operating room. JAMA Surg 153(4):e176233CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Payne TN, Dauterive FR (2010) Robotically assisted hysterectomy: 100 cases after the learning curve. J Robot Surg 4(1):11–17CrossRef Payne TN, Dauterive FR (2010) Robotically assisted hysterectomy: 100 cases after the learning curve. J Robot Surg 4(1):11–17CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Rosero EB, Kho KA, Joshi GP, Giesecke M, Schaffer JI (2013) Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign gynecologic disease. Obstet Gynecol 122(4):778–786CrossRef Rosero EB, Kho KA, Joshi GP, Giesecke M, Schaffer JI (2013) Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign gynecologic disease. Obstet Gynecol 122(4):778–786CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Jacoby VL, Autry A, Jacobson G, Domush R, Nakagawa S, Jacoby A (2009) Nationwide use of laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with abdominal and vaginal approaches. Obstet Gynecol 114(5):1041–1048CrossRef Jacoby VL, Autry A, Jacobson G, Domush R, Nakagawa S, Jacoby A (2009) Nationwide use of laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with abdominal and vaginal approaches. Obstet Gynecol 114(5):1041–1048CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Dubeshter B, Angel C, Toy E, Thomas S, Glantz JC (2013) Current role of robotic hysterectomy. J Gynecol Surg 29(4):174–178CrossRef Dubeshter B, Angel C, Toy E, Thomas S, Glantz JC (2013) Current role of robotic hysterectomy. J Gynecol Surg 29(4):174–178CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Jones HH, Lynch K, Goldman NA, Rutledge J, Burke WM (2015) Robotic-assisted hysterectomy complication rates are similar for all uterine weights [109]. Obstet Gynecol 125:40SCrossRef Jones HH, Lynch K, Goldman NA, Rutledge J, Burke WM (2015) Robotic-assisted hysterectomy complication rates are similar for all uterine weights [109]. Obstet Gynecol 125:40SCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Moawad GN, Abi Khalil ED, Tyan P, Shu MK, Samuel D, Amdur R et al (2017) Comparison of cost and operative outcomes of robotic hysterectomy compared to laparoscopic hysterectomy across different uterine weights. J Robot Surg 11(4):433–439CrossRef Moawad GN, Abi Khalil ED, Tyan P, Shu MK, Samuel D, Amdur R et al (2017) Comparison of cost and operative outcomes of robotic hysterectomy compared to laparoscopic hysterectomy across different uterine weights. J Robot Surg 11(4):433–439CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Direct cost of hysterectomy: comparison of robotic versus other routes
Publication date
01-04-2020
Keyword
Hysterectomy
Published in
Journal of Robotic Surgery / Issue 2/2020
Print ISSN: 1863-2483
Electronic ISSN: 1863-2491
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-019-00982-7

Other articles of this Issue 2/2020

Journal of Robotic Surgery 2/2020 Go to the issue