Reports of robot-assisted live donor nephrectomies (LDNs) have been emerging in the literature. We sought to examine the national incidence of robot-assisted LDNs and to assess regional use and economic differences in robot-assisted versus laparoscopic LDN.
Methods:
Data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) were used to identify patients who underwent either laparoscopic or robot-assisted LDN between 2009 and 2011. Descriptive analysis was performed to examine differences between the laparoscopic and robot-assisted groups.
Results:
A total of 4,163 cases of LDN were performed using robot-assistance or pure laparoscopic surgery between 2009 and 2011. Of these, 142 were classified as robot-assisted nephrectomies; these cases were all from the western United States. There was no difference in the incidence of complications between the laparoscopic and robot-assisted groups (P=0.206). Median (interquartile range [IQR]) total charges for robot-assisted LDN were $48,639 ($42,380–$53,050) vs $37,019 ($28,715–$48,816) for laparoscopic cases (P<0.001).
Conclusions:
The role of robotic assistance in LDN remains to be determined; we identified no benefits to robotic assistance in our study.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Updated 2013. Available at http://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov (Accessed December2013).
2.
TerasakiPI, CeckaJM, GjertsonDW, et al. High survival rates of kidney transplants from spousal and living unrelated donors. N Engl J Med, 1995; 333:333–336.
3.
DavisCL, DelmonicoFL. Living-donor kidney transplantation: A review of the current practices for the live donor. J Am Soc Nephrol, 2005; 16:2098–2110.
4.
MullinsCD, ThomasSK, PradelFG, et al. The economic impact of laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy on kidney transplantation. Transplantation, 2003; 75:1505–1512.
5.
SmithCR, WoodwardRS, CohenDS, et al. Cadaveric versus living donor kidney transplantation: A Medicare payment analysis. Transplantation, 2000; 69:311–314.
YuanH, LiuL, ZhengS, et al. The safety and efficacy of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy for renal transplantation: An updated meta-analysis. Transplant Proc, 2013; 45:65–76.
8.
BenwayBM, BhayaniSB, RogersCG, et al. Robot assisted partial nephrectomy versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal tumors: A multi-institutional analysis of perioperative outcomes. J Urol, 2009; 182:866–872.
9.
YuHY, HeveloneND, LipsitzSR, et al. Use, costs and comparative effectiveness of robotic assisted, laparoscopic and open urological surgery. J Urol, 2012; 187:1392–1398.
10.
MonnMF, BahlerCD, SchneiderEB, et al. Emerging trends in robotic pyeloplasty for the management of ureteropelvic junction obstruction in adults. J Urol, 2013; 189:1352–1357.
11.
RozetF, JaffeJ, BraudG, et al. A direct comparison of robotic assisted versus pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: A single institution experience. J Urol, 2007; 178:478–482.
12.
GalvaniCA, RiloHR, SamameJ, et al. First fully robotic-assisted total pancreatectomy combined with islet autotransplant for the treatment of chronic pancreatitis: A case report. Pancreas, 2013; 42:1188–1189.
13.
HorganS, VanunoD, SileriP, et al. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy for kidney transplantation. Transplantation, 2002; 73:1474–1479.
14.
RenoultE, HubertJ, LadriereM, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic and open live-donor nephrectomy: A comparison of donor morbidity and early renal allograft outcomes. Nephrol Dial Transplant, 2006; 21:472–477.
15.
HubertJ, RenoultE, MoureyE, et al. Complete robotic-assistance during laparoscopic living donor nephrectomies: An evaluation of 38 procedures at a single site. Int J Urol, 2007; 14:986–989.
16.
Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Nationwide Inpatient Sample, 2009–2011. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. December2013. Available at www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/nisoverview.jsp (Accessed: February26, 2014).
17.
KimSP, BoorjianSA, ShahND, et al. Contemporary trends of in-hospital complications and mortality for radical cystectomy. BJU Int, 2012; 110:1163–1168.
18.
SuLM, RatnerLE, MontgomeryRA, et al. Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: Trends in donor and recipient morbidity following 381 consecutive cases. Ann Surg, 2004; 240:358–363.
19.
ScholdJD, GoldfarbDA, BucciniLD, et al. Comorbidity burden and perioperative complications for living kidney donors in the United States. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol, 2013; 8:1773–1782.
20.
LentineKL, PatelA. Risks and outcomes of living donation. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis, 2012; 19:220–228.
21.
GorodnerV, HorganS, GalvaniC, et al. Routine left robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is safe and effective regardless of the presence of vascular anomalies. Transplant Int, 2006; 19:636–640.
22.
GossmannJ, WilhelmA, KachelHG, et al. Long-term consequences of live kidney donation follow-up in 93% of living kidney donors in a single transplant center. Am J Transplant, 2005; 5:2417–2424.
23.
SegevDL, MuzaaleAD, CaffoBS, et al. Perioperative mortality and long-term survival following live kidney donation. JAMA, 2010; 303:959–966.
24.
LiuXS, NarinsHW, MaleyWR, et al. Robotic-assistance does not enhance standard laparoscopic technique for right-sided donor nephrectomy. JSLS, 2012; 16:202–207.
25.
KokNF, LindMY, HanssonBM, et al. Comparison of laparoscopic and mini incision open donor nephrectomy: Single blind, randomised controlled clinical trial. BMJ, 2006; 333:221.
26.
SimforooshN, BasiriA, TabibiA, et al. Comparison of laparoscopic and open donor nephrectomy: A randomized controlled trial. BJU Int, 2005; 95:851–855.
27.
BarbashGI, GliedSA. New technology and health care costs: The case of robot-assisted surgery. N Engl J Med, 2010; 363:701–704.
28.
DolsLF, KokNF, IjzermansJN. Live donor nephrectomy: A review of evidence for surgical techniques. Transplant Int, 2010; 23:121–130.
29.
DallTM, GalloPD, ChakrabartiR, et al. An aging population and growing disease burden will require a large and specialized health care workforce by 2025. Health Aff (Millwood), 2013; 32:2013–2020.
30.
MehtaAJ, MacklisRM. Overview of accountable care organizations for oncology specialists. J Oncol Pract, 2013; 9:216–221.
