Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39367133›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024

Retrospective cost analysis of robotic and laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery and paraesophageal hernia repair.

Wayne Bauerle, Daniel Franey, Anthony Allsbrook, Joseph Evans, Vanessa Reese, Jill Stoltzfus, Meredith Harrison, William Burfeind, Andrew M Brown

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Wayne BauerleDepartment of Surgery, St. Luke's University Health Network, Bethlehem, PA, USA.
Daniel FraneyDepartment of Surgery, St. Luke's University Health Network, Bethlehem, PA, USA.
Anthony AllsbrookDepartment of Surgery, St. Luke's University Health Network, Bethlehem, PA, USA.
Joseph EvansDepartment of Surgery, St. Luke's University Health Network, Bethlehem, PA, USA.
Vanessa ReeseDepartment of Research and Innovation, St. Luke's University Health Network, Bethlehem, PA, USA.
Jill StoltzfusDepartment of Research and Innovation, St. Luke's University Health Network, Bethlehem, PA, USA.
Meredith HarrisonDepartment of Surgery, St. Luke's University Health Network, Bethlehem, PA, USA.
William BurfeindDepartment of Surgery, St. Luke's University Health Network, Bethlehem, PA, USA.
Andrew M BrownDepartment of Surgery, St. Luke's University Health Network, Bethlehem, PA, USA. Andrew.brown2@sluhn.org.ORCID 0000-0001-9375-7501

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIncreased adoption of robotics in foregut surgery evokes questions regarding efficacy, safety, and cost. To many, cost remains a barrier to adoption of a robotic approach. The authors' aim to determine the difference in cost of a robotic (R-) vs laparoscopic (L-) approach for paraesophageal hernia repair (PEHR).

methodsPatients 18 years and older who underwent PEHR between July 2016 and June 2021 at a university health network were included. Variables of interest included 30 day outcomes, 1 year recurrence rates, and several cost variables including hospital length of stay, operating room (OR) time, chargeable supplies and implants, non-chargeable supplies, and indirect cost. Cost data were stratified by type and the presence of fundoplication, as well as the elective versus urgent nature of the procedures. Statistical analysis consisted of parametric and non-parametric analyses, with p < 0.05 denoting statistical significance.

results405 patients were included in the study (n = 188 for R-, n = 217 for L-). Significant differences were observed in the type of anti-reflux procedure performed (p < 0.001), use of mesh (R- 70.2% vs. L- 59.0%, p = 0.019), and whether a Collis gastroplasty was performed (R- 4.3% vs. L- 10.2%, p = 0.023). No differences in 30-day readmission or reoperation rates, Clavien-Dindo complication rates, or 1-year hernia recurrence rates were observed. For elective cases, regardless of the type of anti-reflux procedure performed, a robotic approach was associated with a significantly greater cost (p < 0.002). Comparing all procedures, a statistically significant increase in cost was seen with a robotic approach (R- $29,706.88 vs. L- $23,457.07, p < 0.001).

conclusionsComplication rates and surgical outcomes between the two approaches were similar; however, cost is significantly increased when a robotic approach is utilized. Future studies are needed to delineate which drivers of cost are modifiable with the robot.

Indexed as

FundoplicationHernia, HiatalHerniorrhaphyLaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresAdultAgedCosts and Cost AnalysisFemaleGastroesophageal RefluxHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeRecurrenceCostHerniaLaparoscopicOutcomesParaesophagealRobotic

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.