SpringerLink
Log in

The impact of robotic surgery on a tertiary care colorectal surgery program, an assessment of costs and short term outcomes: A Canadian perspective

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

Background

Robotic surgery for colorectal pathology has gained interest as it can overcome technical challenges and limitations of traditional laparoscopic surgery. A lack of training and costs have been cited as reasons for limiting its use in Canada. The objective of this paper was to assess the impact of robotic surgery on outcomes and costs in a Canadian setting.

Methods

This is a retrospective study of consecutive patients undergoing left sided colorectal surgery (“Pre-Robotic Phase” n = 145 vs. “Post Robotic Phase” n = 150) and a single tertiary care centre in Ontario, Canada. Utilization and success of minimally invasive surgery (MIS), length of stay, complications and hospital costs were compared. Univariate and Multivariate analysis was used for these comparisons.

Results

Characteristics, diagnosis and type of resection were similar between groups. Robotic Implementation resulted in higher rates of successful MIS (i.e. attempt at MIS without conversion) (85% vs. 47%, P < 0.001), shorter mean length of stay (4.7 days vs. 8.4 days, P < 0.001), and similar mean operative times (3.9 h vs. 3.9 h, P = 0.93). Emergency Department visits were fewer in the Robotic Phase (24% vs. 34%, P = 0.04), with no difference in readmission, anastomotic leak or unplanned reoperation. After robotic implementation, the mean total hospital costs decreased, but this was not statistically significant (−$1453, 95% CI −$3974 to +$1068, P = 0.25). Regression analysis, adjusting for age, gender, obesity, ASA and procedure showed similar findings (Robotic Phase −$657, 95% CI −$3038 to +$1724, vs Pre Robotic Phase [Reference], P = 0.59).

Interpretation

Implementation of a robotic colorectal surgery program in a Canadian tertiary care centre showed improved clinical outcomes, without a significant increase in the cost of care. Although this study is from a single institution, we have demonstrated that robotic colorectal surgery is feasible and can be cost effective in the right setting.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (France)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gawande A (2012) Two hundred years of surgery. N Engl J Med 366(18):1716–1723

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Schlich T, Tang CL (2016) Patient choice and the history of minimally invasive surgery. The Lancet 388(10052):1369–1370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Abraha I, Binda GA, Montedori A, Arezzo A, Cirocchi R (2017) Laparoscopic versus open resection for sigmoid diverticulitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017(11):1–51

    Google Scholar 

  4. Schwenk W, Haase O, Neudecker J, Muller JM (2005) Short term benefits for laparoscopic colorectal resection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005(3):1–51

    Google Scholar 

  5. Vennix S, Pelzers L, Bouvy N, Beets GL, Pierie JP, Wiggers T et al (2014) Laparoscopic versus open total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014(4):1–51

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, Cuesta MA, van der Pas MH, de Lange-de Klerk ES et al (2015) A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 372(14):1324–1332

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Jeong SY, Park JW, Nam BH, Kim S, Kang SB, Lim SB et al (2014) Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-rectal or low-rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): survival outcomes of an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 15(7):767–774

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bissolati M, Orsenigo E, Staudacher C (2015) Role of minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of diverticular disease: an evidence-based analysis. Updat Surg 67(4):353–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Sica GS, Biancone L (2013) Surgery for inflammatory bowel disease in the era of laparoscopy. World J Gastroenterol 19(16):2445–2448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kindel T, Latchana N, Swaroop M, Chaudhry UI, Noria SF, Choron RL et al (2015) Laparoscopy in trauma: an overview of complications and related topics. Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci 5(3):196–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Drohan AE, Hoogerboord CM, Johnson PM, Flowerdew GJ, Porte GA (2020) Real-world impact of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a population-based analysis. Curr Oncol 27(3):e251–e258

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Hoogerboord CM, Levy AR, Hu M, Flowerdew G, Porter G (2018) Uptake of elective laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer in Canada from 2004/05 to 2014/15: a descriptive analysis. CMAJ Open 6(3):E384–E390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hoogerboord M, Ellsmere J, Caycedo-Marulanda A, Brown C, Jayaraman S, Urbach D et al (2019) Laparoscopic colectomy: trends in implementation in Canada and globally. Can J Surg 62(2):139–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Moloo H, Haggar F, Martel G, Grimshaw J, Coyle D, Graham ID et al (2009) The adoption of laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a national survey of general surgeons. Can J surg 52(6):455–462

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Hawkins AT, Ford MM, Benjamin Hopkins M, Muldoon RL, Wanderer JP, Parikh AA et al (2018) Barriers to laparoscopic colon resection for cancer: a national analysis. Surg Endosc 32(2):1035–1042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kang CY, Halabi WJ, Luo R, Pigazzi A, Nguyen NT, Stamos MJ (2012) Laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a better look into the latest trends. Arch Surg 147(8):724–731

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Whealon M, Vinci A, Pigazzi A (2016) Future of minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Clin Colon Rectal Surg 29(3):221–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Karcz WK, von Braun W (2016) Minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer. Visc Med 32(3):192–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Brannigan AE, De Buck S, Suetens P, Penninckx F, D’Hoore A (2006) Intracorporeal rectal stapling following laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: overcoming a challenge. Surg Endosc 20(6):952–955

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Phan K, Kahlaee HR, Kim SH, Toh JWT (2019) Laparoscopic vs robotic rectal cancer surgery and the effect on conversion rates: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score-matched studies. Tech Coloproctol 23(3):221–230

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Atallah S, Sylla P, Wexner SD (2019) Norway versus The Netherlands: will taTME stand the test of time? Tech Coloproctol 23(9):803–806

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Caycedo-Marulanda A, Brown CJ, Chadi SA, Ashamalla S, Lee L, Stotland P et al (2020) Canadian taTME expert collaboration (CaTaCO) position statement. Surg Endosc 34(9):3748–3753

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Crawford A, Firtell J, Caycedo-Marulanda A (2019) How is rectal cancer managed: a survey exploring current practice patterns in Canada. J Gastrointest Cancer 50(2):260–268

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Caycedo-Marulanda A, Patel S, Merchant S, Brown C (2020) Introduction of new techniques and technologies in surgery: where is transanal total mesorectal excision today? World J Gastrointest Surg 12(5):203–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ramji KM, Cleghorn MC, Josse JM, MacNeill A, O’Brien C, Urbach D et al (2016) Comparison of clinical and economic outcomes between robotic, laparoscopic, and open rectal cancer surgery: early experience at a tertiary care center. Surg Endosc 30(4):1337–1343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Yeo HL, Isaacs AJ, Abelson JS, Milsom JW, Sedrakyan A (2016) Comparison of open, laparoscopic, and robotic colectomies using a large national database: outcomes and trends related to surgery center volume. Dis Colon Rectum 59(6):535–542

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Cleary RK, Mullard AJ, Ferraro J, Regenbogen SE (2018) The cost of conversion in robotic and laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc 32(3):1515–1524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Davis BR, Yoo AC, Moore M, Gunnarsson C (2014) Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic colectomy: cost and clinical outcomes. JSLS 18(2):211–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Al-Mazrou AM, Baser O, Kiran RP (2018) Propensity score-matched analysis of clinical and financial outcomes after robotic and laparoscopic colorectal resection. J Gastrointest Surg 22(6):1043–1051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Simianu VV, Gaertner WB, Kuntz K, Kwaan MR, Lowry AC, Madoff RD et al (2020) Cost-effectiveness evaluation of laparoscopic versus robotic minimally invasive colectomy. Ann Surg 272(2):334–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Park JS, Choi GS, Park SY, Kim HJ, Ryuk JP (2012) Randomized clinical trial of robot-assisted versus standard laparoscopic right colectomy. Br J Surg 99(9):1219–1226

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Baek SJ, Kim SH, Cho JS, Shin JW, Kim J (2012) Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a cost analysis from a single institute in Korea. World J Surg 36(11):2722–2729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Quijano Y, Nuñez-Alfonsel J, Ielpo B, Ferri V, Caruso R, Durán H et al (2020) Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a comparative cost-effectiveness study. Tech Coloproctol 24(3):247–254

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Simianu VV, Gaertner WB, Kuntz K, Kwaan MR, Lowry AC, Madoff RD, et al (2020) Cost-effectiveness evaluation of laparoscopic versus robotic minimally invasive colectomy. Ann Surg 272(2):334–341. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000003196

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, Croft J, Corrigan N, Copeland J et al (2017) Effect of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery on risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: the ROLARR randomized clinical trial. JAMA 318(16):1569–1580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Beach ML, Baron J (2005) Bias from historical controls, Encyclopedia of biostatistics. Wiley Online Library. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/0470011815

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Queens University, Kingston, ON, Canada

    Sunil V. Patel, Vanessa Wiseman, Lisa Zhang, P. Hugh MacDonald, Shaila M. Merchant & Antonio Caycedo-Marulanda

  2. Kingston Health Sciences Centre, Kingston, ON, Canada

    Sunil V. Patel, Vanessa Wiseman, Lisa Zhang, P. Hugh MacDonald, Shaila M. Merchant, Kathleen Wattie Barnett & Antonio Caycedo-Marulanda

Authors
  1. Sunil V. Patel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vanessa Wiseman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lisa Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. P. Hugh MacDonald
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Shaila M. Merchant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Kathleen Wattie Barnett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Antonio Caycedo-Marulanda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antonio Caycedo-Marulanda.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Dr. Antonio Caycedo-Marulanda receives personal fees from ETHICON and Southmedic. Drs. Sunil V Patel, Vanessa Wiseman, Lisa Zhang, P. Hugh MacDonald, Shaila M. Merchant and Mrs. Kathleen Wattie Barnett have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 32 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Patel, S.V., Wiseman, V., Zhang, L. et al. The impact of robotic surgery on a tertiary care colorectal surgery program, an assessment of costs and short term outcomes: A Canadian perspective. Surg Endosc 36, 6084–6094 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09059-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09059-3

Search

Navigation