Ileovesicostomy for the Neurogenic Bladder Patient: Outcome and Cost Comparison of Open and Robotic Assisted Techniques

被引:11
作者
Vanni, Alex J. [1 ]
Stoffel, John T. [1 ]
机构
[1] Lahey Clin Med Ctr, Tufts Sch Med, Inst Urol, Burlington, MA 01803 USA
关键词
INCONTINENT ILEOVESICOSTOMY; MANAGEMENT; COMPLICATIONS;
D O I
10.1016/j.urology.2010.09.021
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVES To compare the outcomes and cost of open and robotic-assisted ileovesicostomy techniques for the adult neurogenic bladder patient. METHODS Consecutive open and robotic-assisted ileovesicostomy procedures were retrospectively reviewed for demographic, operative, and postoperative recovery data. Surgical outcome was assessed by examining the incidence of postprocedure urinary incontinence, urinary tract infections (UTIs), and upper tract compromise. Total cost was calculated through summation of inpatient costs, including room/board, operating/recovery room, surgical supplies, professional fees, intensive care unit, and robotic maintenance. RESULTS Fifteen ileovesicostomy procedures (7 open, 8 robotic) were reviewed. Both groups had similar demographic and urodynamic data. Operative times (293 min open vs 330 min robotic, P = .24) were similar between techniques. There were trends toward lower operative blood loss (100 mL vs 257 mL, P = .09) and shorter hospital stays in the robotic group (8 days vs 11 days, P = .14). Ileovesicostomy was associated with improved urinary continence (P = .02) and trended toward a decreased incidence of postoperative chronic UTI (P = .13) for the entire group, and there was no difference between techniques regarding continence, chronic UTIs, and complications. No patients in either group developed postoperative hydronephrosis. Total inpatient cost for the open and robotic groups was $14,356 and $17,344 (P = .05), which differed primarily because of higher robotic operating room supply costs ($609 vs $3770, P < .001). CONCLUSION Robotic and open ileovesicostomy had similar surgical outcomes in this patient cohort, although total inpatient costs were significantly higher in the robotic group. UROLOGY 77: 1375-1380, 2011. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:1375 / 1380
页数:6
相关论文
共 25 条
[1]   Pure laparoscopic ileovesicostomy [J].
Abrahams, HM ;
Rahman, NU ;
Meng, MV ;
Stoller, ML .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2003, 170 (02) :517-518
[2]   Robotic augmentation enterocystoplasty [J].
Al-Othman, Khalid E. ;
Al-Hellow, Hamad A. ;
Al-Zahrani, Hassan M. ;
Seyam, Raouf M. .
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2008, 22 (04) :597-600
[3]  
Amodeo A, 2009, Minerva Urol Nefrol, V61, P121
[4]   Advantages and risks of ileovesicostomy for the management of neuropathic bladder [J].
Atan, A ;
Konety, BR ;
Nangia, A ;
Chancellor, MB .
UROLOGY, 1999, 54 (04) :636-640
[5]   Cost Comparison of Robotic, Laparoscopic, and Open Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer [J].
Bolenz, Christian ;
Gupta, Amit ;
Hotze, Timothy ;
Ho, Richard ;
Cadeddu, Jeffrey A. ;
Roehrborn, Claus G. ;
Lotan, Yair .
EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2010, 57 (03) :453-458
[6]   Incontinent ileovesicostomy in the management of neurogenic bladder dysfunction [J].
Gauthier, AR ;
Winters, JC .
NEUROUROLOGY AND URODYNAMICS, 2003, 22 (02) :142-146
[7]   Management of neurogenic bladder dysfunction with incontinent ileovesicostomy [J].
Gudziak, MR ;
Tiguert, R ;
Puri, K ;
Gheiler, EL ;
Triest, JA .
UROLOGY, 1999, 54 (06) :1008-1011
[8]   The Learning Curve for Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy [J].
Guru, Khurshid A. ;
Perlmutter, Adam E. ;
Butt, Zubair M. ;
Piacente, Pamela ;
Wilding, Gregory E. ;
Tan, Wei ;
Kim, Hyung L. ;
Mohler, James L. .
JSLS-JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF LAPAROENDOSCOPIC SURGEONS, 2009, 13 (04) :509-514
[9]   Incontinent Ileovesicostomy: Long-Term Outcomes and Complications [J].
Hellenthal, Nicholas J. ;
Short, Scott S. ;
O'Connor, R. Corey ;
Eandi, Jonathan A. ;
Yap, Stanley A. ;
Stone, Anthony R. .
NEUROUROLOGY AND URODYNAMICS, 2009, 28 (06) :483-486
[10]   Laparoscopic ileovesicostomy [J].
Hsu, THS ;
Rackley, RR ;
Abdelmalak, JB ;
Tchetgen, MB ;
Madjar, S ;
Vasavada, SP .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2002, 168 (01) :180-181