Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Left Lateral Sectionectomy: Analysis of Surgical Outcomes and Costs by a Propensity Score Matched Cohort Study

After comparing with open approach, left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) has become standard in terms of short-term outcomes without jeopardizing long-term survival when performed for malignancy. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term and economic outcomes of laparoscopic (L-LLS) and robotic (R-LLS) LLS. All consecutive patients who underwent L-LLS or R-LLS from 1997 to 2014 were analyzed. Short-term and economic outcomes were compared between the two groups using a propensity score matching (PSM). Ninety-six consecutive cases of LLS were performed using the laparoscopic (80 cases; 83 %) or robotic (16 cases; 17 %) approach. The two groups were similar for operative and surgical outcomes. Operation time was similar in the R-LLS compared to the L-LLS group (190 vs. 162 min; p = 0.10). Perioperative costs were higher (1457 a,notsign vs. 576 a,notsign; p < 0.0001) in the R-LLS group than in the L-LLS group; however, postoperative costs were similar between the two groups (4065 a,notsign in the R-LLS group vs. 5459 a,notsign in the L-LLS group; p = 0.30). Total costs were similar between the two groups (5522 a,notsign in the R-LLS group vs. 6035a,notsign in the L-LLS group; p = 0.70). The PSM included 14 patients for each group. Surgical and economic outcomes remained similar after PSM, except for total operating time which was significantly longer in the R-LLS group than in the L-LLS group. Even if feasible and safe, the robotic approach does not seem so far to offer additional benefit in terms of intra- and postoperative outcomes over the laparoscopic approach in patients requiring LLS. Total costs associated with the R-LLS group are not greater than that associated with the L-LLS group, which is the standard of care so far.