No abstract

Background: While potential benefits of robotic technology include decreased morbidity and improved recovery, some have suggested a prohibitively high cost. This study was undertaken to compare actual hospital costs of robotically assisted cardiac procedures with conventional techniques. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of clinical and financial data of 20 patients who underwent atrial septal defect (ASD) closure and 20 patients who underwent mitral valve repair (MVr) using either robotic techniques or a conventional approach with a sternotomy. Total hospital cost (actual resource consumption) was subdivided into operative and postoperative costs. Results: Robotic technology did not significantly increase total hospital cost for ASD closure or MVr (p = 0.518 and p = 0.539). However, when including the initial capital investment for the robot through amortization of institutional costs, total hospital cost was increased by $3,773 for robotic ASD closure and $3,444 for robotic MVr (p = 0.021 and p = 0.004). The major driver of cost for robotic cases (operating room time) decreased over time. Conclusions: Robotic technology did not significantly increase hospital cost. While the absolute cost for robotic surgery was higher than conventional techniques after taking into account the institutional cost of the robot, the major driver of cost for robotic procedures will likely continue to decrease, as the surgical team becomes increasingly familiar with robotic technology. Furthermore, other benefits, such as improvement in postoperative quality of life and more expeditious return to work may make a robotic approach cost-effective. Thus, it is possible that the benefits of robotic surgery may justify investment in this technology.

No abstract

Robotic technology did not significantly increase hospital cost. While the absolute cost for robotic surgery was higher than conventional techniques after taking into account the institutional cost of the robot, the major driver of cost for robotic procedures will likely continue to decrease, as the surgical team becomes increasingly familiar with robotic technology. Furthermore, other benefits, such as improvement in postoperative quality of life and more expeditious return to work may make a robotic approach cost-effective. Thus, it is possible that the benefits of robotic surgery may justify investment in this technology.

ObjectiveThe objective of this retrospective cohort study was to determine whether coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery is effective and cost-effective relative to medical management of coronary artery disease (CAD) in the elderly. Summary Background DataThe aging of the U.S population and the improvements in surgical techniques have resulted in increasing numbers of elderly patients who undergo this surgery. The three randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) that established the efficacy of CABG surgery completed patient enrollment from 19 to 24 years ago excluded patients older than 65 years. Although information regarding outcomes of CABG in this population is mainly available in case series, a major lacuna exists with respect to information on quality of life and cost effectiveness of surgery as compared with medical management. MethodsThe authors retrospectively formed surgical and medically managed cohorts of octogenarians with significant multivessel CAD. More than 600 medical records of patients older than 80 years who underwent angiography at our institution were reviewed to identify 48 patients who were considered reasonable surgical candidates but had not undergone surgery. This cohort was compared with 176 patients who underwent surgery. ResultsThe cost per quality-adjusted life year saved was $10,424. At 3 years, survival in the surgical group was 80% as compared with 64% in the entire medical cohort and 50% in a smaller subset of the medical cohort. Quality of life in patients who underwent surgery was measurably better than that of the medical cohort with utility index scores, as measured by the EuroQoL, (a seven-item quality of life questionnaire) of 0.84, 0.61, and 0.74, respectively. ConclusionsPerforming CABG surgery in octogenarians is highly costeffective. The quality of life of the elderly who elect to undergo CABG surgery is greater than that of their cohorts and equal to that of an average 55-year-old person in the general population.Secondary to rapidly escalating health-care costs, the outcomes of highly invasive procedures in the elderly are subject to challenge. This study focuses on the survival,