Search

Importance: Use of robotic surgery has increased in urological practice over the last decade. However, the use, outcomes, and costs of robotic nephrectomy are unknown., Objectives: To examine the trend in use of robotic-assisted operations for radical nephrectomy in the United States and to compare the perioperative outcomes and costs with laparoscopic radical nephrectomy., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used the Premier Healthcare database to evaluate outcomes of patients who had undergone robotic-assisted or laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal mass at 416 US hospitals between January 2003 and September 2015. Multivariable regression modeling was used to assess outcomes., Exposures: Robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic radical nephrectomy., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome of the study was the trend in use of robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy. The secondary outcomes were perioperative complications, based on the Clavien classification system, and defined as any complication (Clavien grades 1-5) or major complications (Clavien grades 3-5, for which grade 5 results in death); resource use (operating time, blood transfusion, length of hospital stay); and direct hospital cost., Results: Among 23 753 patients included in the study (mean age, 61.4 years; men, 13 792 [58.1%]), 18 573 underwent laparoscopic radical nephrectomy and 5180 underwent robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy. Use of robotic-assisted surgery increased from 1.5% (39 of 2676 radical nephrectomy procedures in 2003) to 27.0% (862 of 3194 radical nephrectomy procedures) in 2015 (P for trend <.001). In the weighted-adjusted analysis, there were no significant differences between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic radical nephrectomy in the incidence of any (Clavien grades 1-5) postoperative complications (adjusted rates, 22.2% vs 23.4%, difference, -1.2%; 95% CI, -5.4 to 3.0%) or major (Clavien grades 3-5) complications (adjusted rates, 3.5% vs 3.8%, difference, -0.3%; 95% CI, -1.0% to 0.5%). The rate of prolonged operating time (>4 hours) for patients undergoing the robotic-assisted procedure was higher than for patients receiving the laparoscopic procedure in the adjusted analysis (46.3% vs 25.8%; risk difference, 20.5%; 95% CI, 14.2% to 26.8%). Robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy was associated with higher mean 90-day direct hospital costs ($19 530 vs $16 851; difference, $2678; 95% CI, $838 to $4519), mainly accounted for operating room ($7217 vs $5378; difference, $1839; 95% CI, $1050 to $2628) and supply costs ($4876 vs $3891; difference, $985; 95% CI, $473 to $1498)., Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients undergoing radical nephrectomy for renal mass between 2003 and 2015, the use of robotic-assisted surgery increased substantially. The use of robotic-assistance was not associated with increased risk of any or major complications but was associated with prolonged operating time and higher hospital costs compared with laparoscopic surgery.

Introduction: Little is known about the impact of surgeon volume on the success of the robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN). The objective of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes and cost related to RAPN by annual surgeon volumes., Patients and Methods: Using the Premier Hospital Database, we retrospectively analyzed 39,773 patients who underwent RAPN between 2003 and 2015 in the United States. Surgeons for each index case were grouped into quintiles for each respective year. Outcomes were 90-day postoperative complications, operating room time (ORT), blood transfusion, length of stay, and direct hospital costs. Logistic regression and generalized linear models were used to identify factors predicting complications and cost., Results: After accounting for patient and hospital demographics, high- and very high-volume surgeons had 40% and 42% decreased odds of having major complications (p = 0.045 and p = 0.027, respectively). Surgeons with higher volumes were associated with fewer odds of prolonged ORT (0.68 for low, 0.72 for intermediate, 0.56 for high, 0.44 for very high volume, all p < 0.05) and length of hospital stay (0.67 for intermediate, 0.51 for high, 0.45 for very high volume, all p < 0.01) compared with very low-volume surgeons. The 90-day hospital cost was also significantly lower for the surgeons with higher volume, but the statistical significance diminished after consideration of hospital clustering., Conclusion: Surgeons with very high RAPN volumes were found to have superior perioperative outcomes. Although cost of care appeared to correlate with surgeon volume, there may be other more influential factors predicting cost.