Complete daVinci™ versus laparoscopic pyeloplasty: Cost analysis

Journal of Endourology

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 327-332

  Bhayani, Sam B ^a   Link, Richard E ^a   Varkarakis, John M ^a   Kavoussi, Louis R ^a,b  

^a DEPARTMENT OF PATHOLOGY   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; MALE; OPERATION DURATION; PERIOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PYELOPLASTY; SURGICAL INSTRUMENT; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; URETEROPELVIC JUNCTION OBSTRUCTION; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ECONOMICS; FOLLOW UP; HOSPITAL COST; INSTRUMENTATION; KIDNEY PELVIS; LAPAROSCOPY; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK ASSESSMENT; ROBOTICS; STENOSIS, OCCLUSION AND OBSTRUCTION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES; URETER OBSTRUCTION;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CONSTRICTION, PATHOLOGIC; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HOSPITAL COSTS; HUMANS; KIDNEY PELVIS; LAPAROSCOPY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK ASSESSMENT; ROBOTICS; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES; URETERAL OBSTRUCTION;

EID: 18544371190     PISSN: 08927790     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/end.2005.19.327     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Jarrett TW, Chan DY, Charambura TC, et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: The first 100 cases. J Urol 2002;167:1253-1256.
2. Baldwin DD, Dunbar JA, Wells N, et al. Single-center comparison of laparoscopic pyeloplasty, Acucise endopyelotomy, and open pyeloplasty. J Endourol 2003;17:155-160.
3. Tan BJ, Smith AD. Ureteropelvic junction obstruction repair: When, how, what? Curr Opin Urol 2004;14:55-59.
4. Sundaram CP, Grubb RL 3rd, Rehman J, et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty for secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J Urol 2003;169:2037-2040.
5. Gettman MT, Peschel R, Neururer R, et al. A comparison of laparoscopic pyeloplasty performed with the daVinci robotic system versus standard laparoscopic techniques: Initial clinical results. Eur Urol 2002;42:453-457.
6. Sung GT, Gill IS. Robotic laparoscopic surgery: A comparison of the daVinci and Zeus systems. Urology 2001;58:893-898.
7. Menon M, Shrivastava A, Sarle R, et al. Vattikuti Institute Prostatectomy: A single-team experience of 100 cases. J Endourol 2003;17:785-790.
8. Ahlering TE, Skarecky D, Lee D, et al. Successful transfer of open surgical skills to a laparoscopic environment using a robotic interface: Initial experience with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2003;170:1738-1741.
9. Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A, et al. Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: Establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes. J Urol 2002;168: 945-949.
10. Guru KA, Bhandari A, Peabody JO, et al. Cost comparison between robotic-assisted prostatectomy and radical retropubic prostatectomy [abstract 164]. J Urol 2004;171(Suppl 4):43.