A Multidimensional Analysis of Prostate Surgery Costs in the United States: Robotic-Assisted versus Retropubic Radical Prostatectomy

Value in Health

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 391-403

  Bijlani, Akash ^a   Hebert, April E ^a   Davitian, Mike ^a,c   May, Holly ^b,c   Speers, Mark ^b,c   Leung, Robert ^d   Mohamed, Nihal E ^d   Sacks, Henry S ^e   Tewari, Ashutosh ^d  

^a INTUITIVE SURGICAL INC   (United States)

^b Health Advances   (United States)

^c Health Advances LLC   (United States)

^d MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL   (United States)

^e MOUNT SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

cost comparison analysis; economic; RALP; RRP

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL OUTCOME; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC ASPECT; HEALTH CARE COST; HOSPITAL COST; HOSPITALIZATION COST; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE SURGERY; RADICAL RETROPUBIC PROSTATECTOMY; ROBOT ASSISTED SURGERY; SALVAGE THERAPY; SOCIAL ASPECT; SURGICAL EQUIPMENT; UNITED STATES; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST; ECONOMIC MODEL; ECONOMICS; LAPAROSCOPY; MALE; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PROCEDURES; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURE; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HOSPITAL COSTS; HUMANS; LAPAROSCOPY; MALE; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; MODELS, ECONOMIC; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84959535020     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: 15244733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2015.12.019     Document Type: Article

References (114)

1. [1] American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2014. 2014, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA.
2. [2] Cooperberg, M.R., Vickers, A.J., Broering, J.M., et al. Comparative risk-adjusted mortality outcomes after primary surgery, radiotherapy, or androgen-deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer. Cancer 116 (2010), 5226–5234.
3. [3] Barbash, G.I., Glied, S.A., New technology and health care costs—the case of robot-assisted surgery. N Engl J Med 363 (2010), 701–704.
4. [4] Ficarra, V., Novara, G., Fracalanza, S., et al. A prospective, non-randomized trial comparing robot-assisted laparoscopic and retropubic radical prostatectomy in one European institution. BJU Int 104 (2009), 534–539.
5. [5] Tewari, A., Sooriakumaran, P., Bloch, D.A., et al. Positive surgical margin and perioperative complication rates of primary surgical treatments for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing retropubic, laparoscopic, and robotic prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62 (2012), 1–15.
6. [6] Epstein, A.J., Groeneveld, P.W., Harhay, M.O., et al. Impact of minimally invasive surgery on medical spending and employee absenteeism. JAMA Surg 148 (2013), 641–647.
7. [7] Results unproven, robotic surgery wins converts. Available from: 〈www.NYTimes.com/2010/02/14/health/14robot.html?pagewanted=print&_r=0〉. [Accessed July 1, 2014].
8. [8] Mariotto, A.B., Yabroff, K.R., Shao, Y., et al. Projections of the cost of cancer care in the United States: 2010–2020. J Natl Cancer Inst 103 (2011), 117–128.
9. [9] Bolenz, C., Freedland, S.J., Hollenbeck, B.K., et al. Costs of radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 65 (2014), 316–324.
10. [10] Shih, Y.C., Ward, J.F., Pettaway, C.A., et al. Comparative effectiveness, cost, and utilization of radical prostatectomy among young men within managed care insurance plans. Value Health 15 (2012), 367–375.
11. [11] Lowrance, W.T., Eastham, J.A., Yee, D.S., et al. Costs of medical care after open or minimally invasive prostate cancer surgery: a population-based analysis. Cancer 118 (2012), 3079–3086.
12. [12] Nguyen, P.L., Gu, X., Lipsitz, S.R., et al. Cost implications of the rapid adoption of newer technologies for treating prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 29 (2011), 1517–1524.
13. [13] Cooperberg, M.R., Ramakrishna, N.R., Duff, S.B., et al. Primary treatments for clinically localised prostate cancer: a comprehensive lifetime cost-utility analysis. BJU Int 111 (2013), 437–450.
14. [14] Howick J, Chalmers I, Glasziou P, et al. for Centre for Evidence Based Medicine. The Oxford 2011 levels of evidence. Available from: 〈http://www.cebm.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/CEBM-Levels-of-Evidence-2.1.pdf〉. [Accessed January 20, 2015].
15. [15] Sandoval Salinas, C., González Rangel, A.L., Cataño Cataño, J.G., et al. Efficacy of robotic-assisted prostatectomy in localized prostate cancer: a systematic review of clinical trials. Adv Urol, 2013, 2013, 105651.
16. [16] De Carlo, F., Celestino, F., Verri, C., et al. Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes: a systematic review. Urol Int 93 (2014), 373–383.
17. [17] Ficarra, V., Novara, G., Ahlering, T.E., et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62 (2012), 418–430.
18. [18] Ficarra, V., Novara, G., Artibani, W., et al. Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol 55 (2009), 1037–1063.
19. [19] Ficarra, V., Novara, G., Rosen, R.C., et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62 (2012), 405–417.
20. [20] Health Quality Ontario. Robotic-assisted minimally invasive surgery for gynecologic and urologic oncology: an evidence-based analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser 10 (2010), 1–118.
21. [21] Moran, P.S., O'Neill, M., Teljeur, C., et al. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open and laparoscopic approaches: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Urol 20 (2013), 312–321.
22. [22] Novara, G., Ficarra, V., Rosen, R.C., et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62 (2012), 431–452.
23. [23] Pan X-W, Cui X-M, Teng J-F, et al. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy vs. open retropubic radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Indian J Surg 2014. In press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12262-014-1170-y.
24. [24] National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: prostate cancer. Available from: 〈http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/prostate.pdf〉. [Accessed January 8, 2015].
25. [25] Alfonso, J.L., Pereperez, S.B., Canoves, J.M., et al. Are we really seeing the total costs of surgical site infections? A Spanish study. Wound Repair Regen 15 (2007), 474–481.
26. [26] Al-Shaiji, T.F., Kanaroglou, N., Thom, A., et al. A cost-analysis comparison of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy versus open radical prostatectomy: the McMaster Institute of Urology experience. Can Urol Assoc J 4 (2010), 237–241.
27. [27] Bansal, V.K., Misra, M.C., Kumar, S., et al. A prospective randomized study comparing suture mesh fixation versus tacker mesh fixation for laparoscopic repair of incisional and ventral hernias. Surg Endosc 25 (2011), 1431–1438.
28. [28] Bolenz, C., Gupta, A., Hotze, T., et al. Cost comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Eur Urol 57 (2010), 453–458.
29. [29] Broex, E.C., van Asselt, A.D., Bruggeman, C.A., et al. Surgical site infections: how high are the costs?. J Hosp Infect 72 (2009), 193–201.
30. [30] Coello, R., Charlett, A., Wilson, J., et al. Adverse impact of surgical site infections in English hospitals. J Hosp Infect 60 (2005), 93–103.
31. [31] Dasta, J.F., McLaughlin, T.P., Mody, S.H., et al. Daily cost of an intensive care unit day: the contribution of mechanical ventilation. Crit Care Med 33 (2005), 1266–1271.
32. [32] Halpern, N.A., Pastores, S.M., Critical care medicine in the United States 2000–2005: an analysis of bed numbers, occupancy rates, payer mix, and costs. Crit Care Med 38 (2010), 65–71.
33. [33] Herwaldt, L.A., Cullen, J.J., Scholz, D., et al. A prospective study of outcomes, healthcare resource utilization, and costs associated with postoperative nosocomial infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 27 (2006), 1291–1298.
34. [34] Hu, J.C., Gandaglia, G., Karakiewicz, P.I., et al. Comparative effectiveness of robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy cancer control. Eur Urol 66 (2014), 666–672.
35. [35] Lovisetto, F., Zonta, S., Rota, E., et al. Use of human fibrin glue (Tissucol) versus staples for mesh fixation in laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal hernioplasty: a prospective, randomized study. Ann Surg 245 (2007), 222–231.
36. [36] Medina, L.S., Aguirre, E., Altman, N.R., Vesicoureteral reflux imaging in children: comparative cost analysis. Acad Radiol 10 (2003), 139–144.
37. [37] Nguyen XN, Kronick R, Sheingold SH, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Health Policy, US Department of Health and Human Services. Comparing physician payment rates between Medicare and private payers in 2009. Presented at: Academy Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. June 2013. Available from: 〈www.academyhealth.org/files/2013/tuesday/kronick.pdf〉.
38. [38] Olmi, S., Cesana, G., Sagutti, L., et al. Laparoscopic incisional hernia repair with fibrin glue in select patients. JSLS 14 (2010), 240–245.
39. [39] Olsen, M.A., Chu-Ongsakul, S., Brandt, K.E., et al. Hospital-associated costs due to surgical site infection after breast surgery. Arch Surg 143 (2008), 53–60 discussion 61.
40. [40] Outpatient Surgery Magazine. What's new in minimally invasive surgery: a review of new products displayed at the SAGES meeting. Available from: 〈http://www.outpatientsurgery.net/surgical-services/general-surgery/whats-new-in-minimally-invasive-surgery–06-07〉. [Accessed February 13, 2014].
41. [41] Scales, C.D. Jr, Jones, P.J., Eisenstein, E.L., et al. Local cost structures and the economics of robot assisted radical prostatectomy. J Urol 174 (2005), 2323–2329.
42. [42] Shander, A., Hofmann, A., Ozawa, S., et al. Activity-based costs of blood transfusions in surgical patients at four hospitals. Transfusion 50 (2010), 753–765.
43. [43] Spyropoulos, A.C., Lin, J., Direct medical costs of venous thromboembolism and subsequent hospital readmission rates: an administrative claims analysis from 30 managed care organizations. J Manag Care Pharm 13 (2007), 475–486.
44. [44] Steuten L, Vallejo-Torres L, Buxton M. Transferability of economic evaluations of medical devices: an example of the use of fibrin tissue sealant in orthopaedic surgery. Presented at: Proceedings of ESP Conference, The International Regulation of New Medical Technology: health technology adoption in the European Union, North America, East Asia, and in the Developing World. Salzau, Germany. May 7–10, 2007.
45. [45] Weber, W.P., Zwahlen, M., Reck, S., et al. Economic burden of surgical site infections at a European university hospital. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 29 (2008), 623–629.
46. [46] Williams, S.B., Gu, X., Lipsitz, S.R., et al. Utilization and expense of adjuvant cancer therapies following radical prostatectomy. Cancer 117 (2011), 4846–4854.
47. [47] Yee, D.S., Ornstein, D.K., Repair of rectal injury during robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Urology 72 (2008), 428–431.
48. [48] Hall, R.M., Linklater, N., Coughlin, G., Robotic and open radical prostatectomy in the public health sector: cost comparison. ANZ J Surg 84 (2014), 477–480.
49. [49] van Dam, P., Hauspy, J., Verkinderen, L., et al. Are costs of robot-assisted surgery warranted for gynecological procedures?. Obstet Gynecol Int, 2011, 2011, 973830.
50. [50] Joseph, J.V., Leonhardt, A., Patel, H.R.H., The cost of radical prostatectomy: retrospective comparison of open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted approaches. J Robotic Surg 2 (2008), 21–24.
51. [51] Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Databases. Available from: 〈www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/databases.jsp〉. [Accessed January 9, 2015].
52. [52] Ahlering, T.E., Woo, D., Eichel, L., et al. Robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy: a comparison of one surgeon's outcomes. Urology 63 (2004), 819–822.
53. [53] Chan, R.C., Barocas, D.A., Chang, S.S., et al. Effect of a large prostate gland on open and robotically assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 101 (2008), 1140–1144.
54. [54] Cheetham, P.J., Lee, D.J., Rose-Morris, A., et al. Does the presence of robotic surgery affect demographics in patients choosing to undergo radical prostatectomy? A multi-center contemporary analysis. J Robotic Surg 4 (2010), 155–160.
55. [55] Choo, M.S., Choi, W.S., Cho, S.Y., et al. Impact of prostate volume on oncological and functional outcomes after radical prostatectomy: robot-assisted laparoscopic versus open retropubic. Korean J Urol 54 (2013), 15–21.
56. [56] D'Alonzo, R.C., Gan, T.J., Moul, J.W., et al. A retrospective comparison of anesthetic management of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy versus radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Clin Anesth 21 (2009), 322–328.
57. [57] Di Pierro, G.B., Baumeister, P., Stucki, P., et al. A prospective trial comparing consecutive series of open retropubic and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in a centre with a limited caseload. Eur Urol 59 (2011), 1–6.
58. [58] Doumerc, N., Yuen, C., Savdie, R., et al. Should experienced open prostatic surgeons convert to robotic surgery? The real learning curve for one surgeon over 3 years. BJU Int 106 (2010), 378–384.
59. [59] Drouin, S.J., Vaessen, C., Hupertan, V., et al. Comparison of mid-term carcinologic control obtained after open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer. World J Urol 27 (2009), 599–605.
60. [60] Fracalanza, S., Ficarra, V., Cavalleri, S., et al. Is robotically assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy less invasive than retropubic radical prostatectomy? Results from a prospective, unrandomized, comparative study. BJU Int 101 (2008), 1145–1149.
61. [61] Gainsburg, D.M., Wax, D., Reich, D.L., et al. Intraoperative management of robotic-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy. JSLS 14 (2010), 1–5.
62. [62] Geraerts, I., Van Poppel, H., Devoogdt, N., et al. Prospective evaluation of urinary incontinence, voiding symptoms and quality of life after open and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 112 (2013), 936–943.
63. [63] Ham, W.S., Park, S.Y., Kim, W.T., et al. Open versus robotic radical prostatectomy: a prospective analysis based on a single surgeon's experience. J Robotic Surg 2 (2008), 235–241.
64. [64] Hong, J.Y., Kim, J.Y., Choi, Y.D., et al. Incidence of venous gas embolism during robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is lower than that during radical retropubic prostatectomy. Br J Anaesth 105 (2010), 777–781.
65. [65] Kim, S.C., Song, C., Kim, W., et al. Factors determining functional outcomes after radical prostatectomy: robot-assisted versus retropubic. Eur Urol 60 (2011), 413–419.
66. [66] Krambeck, A.E., DiMarco, D.S., Rangel, L.J., et al. Radical prostatectomy for prostatic adenocarcinoma: a matched comparison of open retropubic and robot-assisted techniques. BJU Int 103 (2009), 448–453.
67. [67] Nelson, B., Kaufman, M., Broughton, G., et al. Comparison of length of hospital stay between radical retropubic prostatectomy and robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. J Urol 177 (2007), 929–931.
68. [68] Rocco, B., Matei, D.V., Melegari, S., et al. Robotic vs open prostatectomy in a laparoscopically naive centre: a matched-pair analysis. BJU Int 104 (2009), 991–995.
69. [69] Ryu, J., Kwon, T., Kyung, Y.S., et al. Retropubic versus robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy for prostate cancer: a comparative study of postoperative complications. Korean J Urol 54 (2013), 756–761.
70. [70] Son, S.J., Lee, S.C., Jeong, C.W., et al. Comparison of continence recovery between robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy and open radical retropubic prostatectomy: a single surgeon experience. Korean J Urol 54 (2013), 598–602.
71. [71] Stranne, J., Johansson, E., Nilsson, A., et al. Inguinal hernia after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: results from a randomized setting and a nonrandomized setting. Eur Urol 58 (2010), 719–726.
72. [72] Tewari, A., Srivasatava, A., Menon, M., et al. A prospective comparison of radical retropubic and robot-assisted prostatectomy: experience in one institution. BJU Int 92 (2003), 205–210.
73. [73] Truesdale, M.D., Lee, D.J., Cheetham, P.J., et al. Assessment of lymph node yield after pelvic lymph node dissection in men with prostate cancer: a comparison between robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and open radical prostatectomy in the modern era. J Endourol 24 (2010), 1055–1060.
74. [74] Wood, D.P., Schulte, R., Dunn, R.L., et al. Short-term health outcome differences between robotic and conventional radical prostatectomy. Urology 70 (2007), 945–949.
75. [75] Zorn, K.C., Katz, M.H., Bernstein, A., et al. Pelvic lymphadenectomy during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: assessing nodal yield, perioperative outcomes, and complications. Urology 74 (2009), 296–302.
76. [76] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Labor force statistics from the current population survey. Available from: 〈http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat03.htm〉. [Accessed August 22, 2014].
77. [77] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Usual weekly earnings of wage and salary workers: second quarter 2014. Available from: 〈http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/wkyeng.pdf〉. [Accessed August 22, 2014].
78. [78] Lotan, Y., Cadeddu, J.A., Gettman, M.T., The new economics of radical prostatectomy: cost comparison of open, laparoscopic and robot assisted techniques. J Urol 172 (2004), 1431–1435.
79. [79] Mir, S.A., Cadeddu, J.A., Sleeper, J.P., et al. Cost comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open partial nephrectomy. J Endourol 25 (2011), 447–453.
80. [80] Abdollah, F., Budaus, L., Sun, M., et al. Impact of caseload on total hospital charges: a direct comparison between minimally invasive and open radical prostatectomy—a population based study. J Urol 185 (2011), 855–861.
81. [81] Budaus, L., Abdollah, F., Sun, M., et al. The impact of surgical experience on total hospital charges for minimally invasive prostatectomy: a population-based study. BJU Int 108 (2011), 888–893.
82. [82] Hyams, E.S., Mullins, J.K., Pierorazio, P.M., et al. Impact of robotic technique and surgical volume on the cost of radical prostatectomy. J Endourol 27 (2013), 298–303.
83. [83] Trinh, Q.D., Bjartell, A., Freedland, S.J., et al. A systematic review of the volume-outcome relationship for radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 64 (2013), 786–798.
84. [84] Yu, H.Y., Hevelone, N.D., Lipsitz, S.R., et al. Hospital volume, utilization, costs and outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 187 (2012), 1632–1637.
85. [85] Anderson, C.B., Penson, D.F., Ni, S., et al. Centralization of radical prostatectomy in the United States. J Urol 189 (2013), 500–506.
86. [86] Makarov, D.V., Yu, J.B., Desai, R.A., et al. The association between diffusion of the surgical robot and radical prostatectomy rates. Med Care 49 (2011), 333–339.
87. [87] Neuner, J.M., See, W.A., Pezzin, L.E., et al. The association of robotic surgical technology and hospital prostatectomy volumes: increasing market share through the adoption of technology. Cancer 118 (2012), 371–377.
88. [88] Stitzenberg, K.B., Wong, Y.N., Nielsen, M.E., et al. Trends in radical prostatectomy: centralization, robotics, and access to urologic cancer care. Cancer 118 (2012), 54–62.
89. [89] Chatterjee, A., Payette, M.J., Demas, C.P., et al. Opportunity cost: a systematic application to surgery. Surgery 146 (2009), 18–22.
90. [90] Ahlering, T.E., 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 170 (2003), 1738–1741.
91. [91] Choi, H., Ko, Y.H., Kang, S.G., et al. Biopsy related prostate status does not affect on the clinicopathological outcome of robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Cancer Res Treat 41 (2009), 205–210.
92. [92] Rebuck, D.A., Zhao, L.C., Helfand, B.T., et al. Simple modifications in operating room processes to reduce the times and costs associated with robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Endourol 25 (2011), 955–960.
93. [93] Lasser, M.S., Patel, C.K., Elsamra, S.E., et al. Dedicated robotics team reduces pre-surgical preparation time. Indian J Urol 28 (2012), 263–266.
94. [94] Buzad, F.A., Corne, L.M., Brown, T.C., et al. Single-site robotic cholecystectomy: efficiency and cost analysis. Int J Med Robot 9 (2013), 365–370.
95. [95] Zorn, K.C., Trinh, Q.D., Jeldres, C., et al. Prospective randomized trial of barbed polyglyconate suture to facilitate vesico-urethral anastomosis during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: time reduction and cost benefit. BJU Int 109 (2012), 1526–1532.
96. [96] Rehman, S., Raza, S.J., Stegemann, A.P., et al. Simulation-based robot-assisted surgical training: a health economic evaluation. Int J Surg 11 (2013), 841–846.
97. [97] Burgess, S.V., Atug, F., Castle, E.P., et al. Cost analysis of radical retropubic, perineal, and robotic prostatectomy. J Endourol 20 (2006), 827–830.
98. [98] Chang, S.L., Kibel, A.S., Brooks, J.D., et al. The impact of robotic surgery on the surgical management of prostate cancer in the USA. BJU Int 115 (2015), 929–936.
99. [99] Eldefrawy, A., Katkoori, D., Abramowitz, M., et al. Active surveillance vs. treatment for low-risk prostate cancer: a cost comparison. Urol Oncol 31 (2013), 576–580.
100. [100] Kim, S.P., Shah, N.D., Karnes, R.J., et al. Hospitalization costs for radical prostatectomy attributable to robotic surgery. Eur Urol 64 (2013), 11–16.
101. [101] Mouraviev, V., Nosnik, I., Sun, L., et al. Financial comparative analysis of minimally invasive surgery to open surgery for localized prostate cancer: a single-institution experience. Urology 69 (2007), 311–314.
102. [102] Tomaszewski, J.J., Matchett, J.C., Davies, B.J., et al. Comparative hospital cost-analysis of open and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. Urology 80 (2012), 126–129.
103. [103] Yu, H.Y., Hevelone, N.D., Lipsitz, S.R., et al. Use, costs and comparative effectiveness of robotic assisted, laparoscopic and open urological surgery. J Urol 187 (2012), 1392–1398.
104. [104] Steinberg, P.L., Merguerian, P.A., Bihrle, W. III, et al. The cost of learning robotic-assisted prostatectomy. Urology 72 (2008), 1068–1072.
105. [105] Bosch, J.L., Lester, J.S., McMahon, P.M., et al. Hospital costs for elective endovascular and surgical repairs of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms. Radiology 220 (2001), 492–497.
106. [106] Link, R.E., Su, L.M., Bhayani, S.B., et al. Making ends meet: a cost comparison of laparoscopic and open radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 172 (2004), 269–274.
107. [107] Laviana, A.A., Hu, J.C., A comparison of the robotic-assisted versus retropubic radical prostatectomy. Minerva Urol Nefrol 65 (2013), 161–170.
108. [108] Novara, G., Ficarra, V., Mocellin, S., et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting oncologic outcome after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62 (2012), 382–404.
109. [109] Yabroff, K.R., Kim, Y., Time costs associated with informal caregiving for cancer survivors. Cancer 115 (2009), 4362–4373.
110. [110] Nosnik, I.P., Gan, T.J., Moul, J.W., Open radical retropubic prostatectomy 2007: the true minimally invasive surgery for localized prostate cancer?. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 7 (2007), 1309–1317.
111. [111] Kaufman, M.R., Smith, J.A. Jr, Baumgartner, R.G., et al. Positive influence of robotically assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy on the collaborative-care pathway for open radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 97 (2006), 473–475.
112. [112] Nielsen, M.E., Schaeffer, E.M., Marschke, P., et al. High anterior release of the levator fascia improves sexual function following open radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 180 (2008), 2557–2564 discussion 64.
113. [113] Kaul, S., Savera, A., Badani, K., et al. Functional outcomes and oncological efficacy of Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy with Veil of Aphrodite nerve-sparing: an analysis of 154 consecutive patients. BJU Int 97 (2006), 467–472.
114. [114] Magera, J.S. Jr, Inman, B.A., Slezak, J.M., et al. Increased optical magnification from 2.5x to 4.3x with technical modification lowers the positive margin rate in open radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 179 (2008), 130–135.