Abstract
Purpose:
Robot-assisted surgery has been touted as offering superior outcomes in various oncologic surgeries. We sought to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of robotic radical nephrectomy (RRN) compared with laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) in regard to hospital charges, complications, and survival.
Materials and Methods:
Using the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program-Medicare linked database, we identified patients over the age of 65 who underwent radical nephrectomy (
Results:
Two hundred forty-one patients underwent RRN, and 574 patients underwent LRN. After propensity score matching, the adverse events rate and length of stay were similar between two groups (Major Events: 5.7% vs 6.1%, p = 0.84; prolonged LOS: 17.8% vs 16.1%, p = 0.62). The inpatient charges following RRN were significantly higher than those of LRN ($53,681 vs $44,161, p < 0.01). The mean follow-up of the cohort was 3.2 years. Estimated overall survival (88.0% vs 87.9%, p = 0.90) and cancer-specific survival (98.1% vs 96.4%, p = 0.25) were similar between the two matched cohorts at 3 years.
Conclusion:
The robotic platform showed no benefit over standard laparoscopy for
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
