Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A comparative study of medical resource utilization and clinical outcomes

Conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC) is currently the standard of surgical procedure for gallstone disease. Robotic cholecystectomy (RC) has revolutionized the field of minimally invasive surgery; it is safe and ergonomic, but expensive. The aim of this study is to compare the medical resource utilization and clinical outcomes between the two procedures. This study was conducted retrospectively by assessing data of the clinical outcomes and medical resource of 78 patients receiving RC and 367 patients receiving CLC. We reviewed the data of operation times, length of hospital stay, hospital charges, outpatient department visits, outpatient department service charges, and postoperative complications, which were retrieved from the health information system (HIS) database in this hospital. Patients in both groups had similar demographic and clinical features. The RC group had longer length of hospital stay (p = 0.056), significantly longer operation time (p = 0.035), and much more hospital charges (p = 0.001). The RC group, however, experienced less postoperative complication rates (average 3.8% vs. 20.4%, p = 0.001). Conversion rate was 1.9% in the CLC group versus 0% in the RC group (p = 0.611). Most complications were mild, and following the Clavien-Dindo classification, there were two cases (2.5%) Grade I for the RC group; 50 cases (13.6%) Grade I and 14 cases (3.81%) Grade II for the CLC group (p < 0.001 and 0.001, respectively). Procedure-related complications of Grade IIIa status were encountered in nine patients (2.45%) in the CLC group and none in the RC group (p = 0.002).The RC group consumed more medical resources in the index hospitalization; however, they experienced significantly less postoperative complications.