Evaluation of the economic impact of the robotic approach in major and postero-superior segment liver resections: a multicenter retrospective analysis.

Abstract

Economic impact of robotic liver surgery (RLS) is still a debated issue due to the heterogeneity of liver resections considered and the lack of a rigorous methodology. Therefore, the aim of this study is to perform a time-driven activity-based costing (TD-ABC) comparing the costs of RLS, laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS) and open liver surgery (OLS) in the context of complex liver resections and to compare short term perioperative outcomes. The institutional databases of two Italian high volume hepatobiliary centres were retrospectively reviewed from February 2021 to April 2022. Patients submitted to major hepatectomies or postero-superior liver resections were selected and divided into three groups according to the approach scheduled (RLS, LLS and OLS) and compared. Major contributors of perioperative expenses were calculated using the TD-ABC model and accurately quantifying each unit resource consumed per patient and the time spent performing each activity. A primary intention-to-treat analysis (ITT-A) including conversions in the RLS and LLS groups was performed. Forty-seven RLS, 101 LLS and 124 OLS were collected. LLS and RLS showed reduced blood loss, morbidity, mortality and hospital stay compared with open. A trend towards reduced conversion rate in RLS compared to LLS was registered. Total costs associated with RLS were estimated at €10,637 vs. €9,543 for LLS and vs. €13,960 for OLS. The higher intraoperative costs associated with RLS (+153.3% vs. OLS and +148.2% vs. LLS, P<0.001), primarily related to surgical equipment expenses, were slightly offset by the postoperative savings (-56.0% vs. OLS and -29.4% vs. LLS, P<0.001) resulting from significantly reduced hospital stays. RLS offers economic advantages over OLS, as initial higher costs are offset by better perioperative outcomes. The evolving robotic marketplace is expected to drive down RLS costs, promoting widespread adoption in minimally invasive procedures. Despite its higher costs than LLS, RLS's ability to enhance minimally invasive feasibility makes it a preferred choice for complex cases, reducing the need for conversions.