↓ Skip to main content

Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer in a single surgeon’s experience: a cost analysis covering the initial 50 robotic cases with the da Vinci Si

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Colorectal Disease, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
Title
Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer in a single surgeon’s experience: a cost analysis covering the initial 50 robotic cases with the da Vinci Si
Published in
International Journal of Colorectal Disease, July 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00384-016-2631-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luca Morelli, Simone Guadagni, Valentina Lorenzoni, Gregorio Di Franco, Luigi Cobuccio, Matteo Palmeri, Giovanni Caprili, Cristiano D’Isidoro, Andrea Moglia, Vincenzo Ferrari, Giulio Di Candio, Franco Mosca, Giuseppe Turchetti

Abstract

The aim of this study is to compare surgical parameters and the costs of robotic surgery with those of laparoscopic approach in rectal cancer based on a single surgeon's early robotic experience. Data from 25 laparoscopic (LapTME) and the first 50 robotic (RobTME) rectal resections performed at our institution by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon (>100 procedures) between 2009 and 2014 were retrospectively analyzed and compared. Patient demographic, procedure, and outcome data were gathered. Costs of the two procedures were collected, differentiated into fixed and variable costs, and analyzed against the robotic learning curve according to the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method. Based on CUSUM analysis, RobTME group was divided into three phases (Rob1: 1-19; Rob2: 20-40; Rob3: 41-50). Overall median operative time (OT) was significantly lower in LapTME than in RobTME (270 vs 312.5 min, p = 0.006). A statistically significant change in OT by phase of robotic experience was detected in the RobTME group (p = 0.010). Overall mean costs associated with LapTME procedures were significantly lower than with RobTME (p < 0.001). Statistically significant reductions in variable and overall costs were found between robotic phases (p < 0.009 for both). With fixed costs excluded, the difference between laparoscopic and Rob3 was no longer statistically significant. Our results suggest a significant optimization of robotic rectal surgery's costs with experience. Efforts to reduce the dominant fixed cost are recommended to maintain the sustainability of the system and benefit from the technical advantages offered by the robot.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 40%
Unspecified 6 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Researcher 2 5%
Other 7 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 64%
Unspecified 10 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Other 2 5%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 September 2016.
All research outputs
#3,219,162
of 12,220,568 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Colorectal Disease
#135
of 964 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,733
of 263,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Colorectal Disease
#7
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,220,568 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 964 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,064 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.