A Cost-analysis Study of Robotic Versus Conventional Mitral Valve Repair

Background: Robotic mitral valve repair has been performed in Australia since 2004. The aim of this study was to perform a cost-analysis of robotic mitral valve repair (MVR) with direct comparison to conventional MVR surgery. Methods: All isolated MVRs performed within one metropolitan hospital network, between June 2005 and June 2008, were retrospectively compared. Ad hoc cost analysis was conducted. Results: There were 107 robotic and 40 conventional MVRs performed. The post-operative degrees of mitral regurgitation were comparable. Total operating time was 18% longer in robotic compared to conventional (239 min vs. 202 min, p < 0.001, 95% CI: 11-27%). In robotic, Intensive Care Unit stay was reduced by 19% (p = 0.002, 37 h vs. 45 h), and length of hospital stay was reduced by 26% (p < 0.001, 6.47 days vs. 8.76 days). Mean hospital cost, without including capital costs, was not significantly increased (AUD$18,503 vs. AUD$17,880 p = 0.176, 95% CI: -282 to 1,530). Conclusions: Robotic mitral repair can be performed with similar immediate repair success rates as conventional surgery with a shorter recovery time, but a slightly longer operative time. There is no significant increase in cost over conventional surgery. (Heart, Lung and Circulation 2010;19:413-418) Crown Copyright (C) 2010 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Australasian Society of Cardiac and Thoracic Surgeons and the Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand. All rights reserved.