Robotic-assisted surgery balancing evidence and implementation

JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association

Volumn 318, Issue 16, 2017, Pages 1545-1547

  Wright, Jason D ^a,b  

^a College of Physicians and Surg ^*  (United States)

^b Department of Medicine   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DEVICE SAFETY; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; MINIMALLY INVASIVE PROCEDURE; OPERATION DURATION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECTUM RESECTION; REVIEW; ROBOT ASSISTED SURGERY; ROBOT-ASSISTED PROSTATECTOMY; SURGICAL APPROACH; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURE; ROBOTICS;

HUMANS; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; ROBOTICS;

EID: 85032467570     PISSN: 00987484     EISSN: 15383598     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2017.13696     Document Type: Review

References (15)

1. SchwenkW, Haase O, Neudecker J, Müller JM. Short-term benefits for laparoscopic colorectal resection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;(3): CD003145.
2. Hu JC, Gu X, Lipsitz SR, et al. Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy. JAMA. 2009;302(14):1557-1564.
3. Ezekian B, Sun Z, Adam MA, et al. Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic colectomy results in increased operative time without improved perioperative outcomes. J Gastrointest Surg. 2016;20(8):1503-1510.
4. Huang Y, Chua TC, Maddern GJ, Samra JS. Robotic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Ameta-analysis. Surgery. 2017;161(3):628-636.
5. Wright JD, Ananth CV, Lewin SN, et al. Robotically assisted vs laparoscopic hysterectomy among women with benign gynecologic disease. JAMA. 2013;309(7):689-698.
6. Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, et al. Effect of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery on risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: The ROLARR randomized clinical trial. JAMA. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.7219
7. Jeong IG, Khandwala YS, Kim JH, et al. Association of robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic radical nephrectomy with perioperative outcomes and health care costs, 2003 to 2015. JAMA. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.14586
8. McCulloch P, Altman DG, Campbell WB, et al; Balliol Collaboration. No surgical innovation without evaluation: The IDEAL recommendations. Lancet. 2009;374(9695):1105-1112.
9. Sedrakyan A, Campbell B, Merino JG, Kuntz R, Hirst A, McCulloch P. IDEAL-D: A rational framework for evaluating and regulating the use of medical devices. BMJ. 2016;353:i2372.
10. Ardaugh BM, Graves SE, Redberg RF. The 510(k) ancestry of ametal-on-metal hip implant. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(2):97-100.
11. Shuren J, Califf RM. Need for a national evaluation system for health technology. JAMA. 2016;316(11):1153-1154.
12. National Evaluation System for Health Technology. https://www.fda .gov/aboutfda/centersoffices /officeofmedicalproductsandtobacco/cdrh /cdrhreports/ucm301912.htm. Accessed September 21, 2017.
13. Barbash GI, Glied SA. New technology and health care costs-the case of robot-assisted surgery. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(8):701-704.
14. Schiavone MB, Kuo EC, Naumann RW, et al. The commercialization of robotic surgery: Unsubstantiated marketing of gynecologic surgery by hospitals. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;207(3): 174.e1-174.e7.
15. Wright JD, Tergas AI, Hou JY, et al. Effect of regional hospital competition and hospital financial status on the use of robotic-assisted surgery. JAMA Surg. 2016;151(7):612-620.