Analysis of fixed and variable operating room (or) time point efficiency in partial nephrectomies: open versus robotic-assisted

Laura E Geldmaker; Christopher H Hasse; Bryce A Baird; Christian A Ericson; Amanda A Myers; Daniela A Haehn; Abena N Anyane-Yeboah; Mikolaj A Wieczorek; Colleen T Ball; Timothy D Lyon; Raymond W Pak; David D Thiel

doi:10.1007/s11701-022-01477-8

Back

Analysis of fixed and variable operating room (or) time point efficiency in partial nephrectomies: open versus robotic-assisted

Journal article

Open access

Peer reviewed

Analysis of fixed and variable operating room (or) time point efficiency in partial nephrectomies: open versus robotic-assisted

Laura E Geldmaker, Christopher H Hasse, Bryce A Baird, Christian A Ericson, Amanda A Myers, Daniela A Haehn, Abena N Anyane-Yeboah, Mikolaj A Wieczorek, Colleen T Ball, Timothy D Lyon, …

Journal of robotic surgery, Vol.17(3), pp.853-858

06/01/2023

DOI: 10.1007/s11701-022-01477-8

PMCID: PMC9628460

PMID: 36318380

Files and links (1)

url

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-022-01477-8View

Published (Version of record) Open Access

Abstract

To analyze operating room (OR) efficiency by evaluating fixed and variable OR times for open (OPN) and robotic-assisted partial nephrectomies (RAPN). We analyzed consecutive OPN and RAPN performed by one surgeon over a 24-month period. All patients were placed in the lateral decubitus position and secured with a beanbag regardless of approach. Fixed (non-procedural) OR times were prospectively collected and defined as: in-room to anesthesia-release time (IRAT), anesthesia release to cut time (ARCT), and close to wheels-out time (CTWO). Variable OR time was procedural cut to close time (CTCT). Comparisons of fixed and variable OR time points between OPN and RAPN were performed using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. 146 RAPN and 31 OPN were evaluated from 2019-2020. Median IRAT was similar for RAPN versus OPN [20 min (IQR: 16-25) vs. 20 min (IQR: 16-26), P = 0.57]. Median ARCT was longer for RAPN than it was for OPN [40 min (IQR: 36-46) vs. 34 min (IQR: 30-39), P < 0.001]. Median CTWO was similar for OPN (12 min, IQR: 9-14) and RAPN (11 min, IQR: 7-15) (P = 0.89). Median CTCT was longer for RAPN (202 min, IQR: 170-236) compared to OPN (164 min, IQR: 154-184) (P < 0.001). In a single surgeon, partial nephrectomy series with the same patient positioning, utilization of robotic technology was associated with longer surgeon operating time as well as less efficient fixed OR times, specifically ARCT.

Humans

Kidney Neoplasms - surgery

Nephrectomy

Operating Rooms

Retrospective Studies

Robotic Surgical Procedures - methods

Treatment Outcome

Details

Title: Subtitle: Analysis of fixed and variable operating room (or) time point efficiency in partial nephrectomies: open versus robotic-assisted
Creators: Laura E Geldmaker - Mayo Clinic in Florida
Christopher H Hasse - Mayo Clinic in Florida
Bryce A Baird - Mayo Clinic in Florida
Christian A Ericson - Mayo Clinic in Florida
Amanda A Myers - Mayo Clinic in Florida
Daniela A Haehn - Mayo Clinic in Florida
Abena N Anyane-Yeboah - Mayo Clinic in Florida
Mikolaj A Wieczorek - Mayo Clinic in Florida
Colleen T Ball - Mayo Clinic in Florida
Timothy D Lyon - Mayo Clinic in Florida
Raymond W Pak - Mayo Clinic in Florida
David D Thiel - Mayo Clinic in Florida
Resource Type: Journal article
Publication Details: Journal of robotic surgery, Vol.17(3), pp.853-858
DOI: 10.1007/s11701-022-01477-8
PMID: 36318380
PMCID: PMC9628460
NLM abbreviation: J Robot Surg
ISSN: 1863-2491
eISSN: 1863-2491
Language: English
Date published: 06/01/2023
Academic Unit: Urology
Record Identifier: 9984934669802771

Metrics

3 Record Views