Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Utility of multiparametric MRI including T1/T2 mapping and IVIM/diffusion imaging for the evaluation of non-obstructive azoospermia.

Magma (New York, N.Y.)·2025
Same author

Demographics, Complications, and Management of Genitourinary Gunshot Wounds: National Trauma Data Bank Analysis.

Urology·2025
Same author

Adoption of Single-Port Robotic Partial Nephrectomy Increases Utilization of the Retroperitoneal Approach: A Report from the Single-Port Advanced Research Consortium.

Journal of laparoendoscopic & advanced surgical techniques. Part A·2025
Same author

Ethnicity and race as modifiers of the association between patient sex and stage at diagnosis of bladder cancer.

Cancer epidemiology·2025
Same author

Comparison of outcomes between single-port and multi-port robotic radical nephrectomy.

Journal of robotic surgery·2024
Same author

Comparison of outcomes between single-port and multiport retroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy.

Urologic oncology·2024

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 21, 2026

Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
12:10

Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

Published on: May 19, 2022

9.5K

Reducing robotic prostatectomy costs by minimizing instrumentation.

Joan C Delto1, George Wayne, Rafael Yanes

  • 11 Department of Urology, Mount Sinai Medical Center , Miami Beach, Florida.

Journal of Endourology
|October 22, 2014
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Minimizing robotic instrument costs by 40% is achievable through strategic instrument selection and creative utilization. This approach to robotic surgery cost reduction does not compromise patient safety or operative outcomes.

More Related Videos

Surgical Robot-Assisted Transanal Specimen Extraction Radical Sigmoidectomy Without an Auxiliary Abdominal Incision
07:22

Surgical Robot-Assisted Transanal Specimen Extraction Radical Sigmoidectomy Without an Auxiliary Abdominal Incision

Published on: June 13, 2025

1.3K
Robotic-assisted Lateral Pancreaticojejunostomy for Chronic Pancreatitis
11:07

Robotic-assisted Lateral Pancreaticojejunostomy for Chronic Pancreatitis

Published on: September 5, 2025

1.1K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Apr 21, 2026

Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
12:10

Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

Published on: May 19, 2022

9.5K
Surgical Robot-Assisted Transanal Specimen Extraction Radical Sigmoidectomy Without an Auxiliary Abdominal Incision
07:22

Surgical Robot-Assisted Transanal Specimen Extraction Radical Sigmoidectomy Without an Auxiliary Abdominal Incision

Published on: June 13, 2025

1.3K
Robotic-assisted Lateral Pancreaticojejunostomy for Chronic Pancreatitis
11:07

Robotic-assisted Lateral Pancreaticojejunostomy for Chronic Pancreatitis

Published on: September 5, 2025

1.1K

Area of Science:

  • Urology
  • Surgical Technology
  • Health Economics

Background:

  • Robotic surgery for radical prostatectomy offers potential benefits but faces scrutiny due to high costs.
  • High costs are attributed to the robotic system's fixed and variable expenses, particularly instrumentation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To develop a cost-benefit framework for selecting robotic surgery equipment and materials.
  • To identify strategies for reducing instrumentation costs in robot-assisted prostatectomy without compromising outcomes.

Main Methods:

  • Queried surgeons on preferred instruments for robot-assisted prostatectomy.
  • Obtained and clustered instrument costs, identifying a minimal instrument set.
  • Performed a retrospective review of 125 patients to compare outcomes (EBL, operative time, complications) between different instrumentation strategies.

Main Results:

  • Modified instrumentation strategies reduced costs by up to 40% compared to standard approaches.
  • Cost reductions were achieved by eliminating specific energy devices and utilizing versatile, inexpensive instruments.
  • No increase in estimated blood loss (EBL), operative time, or intraoperative complications was observed.

Conclusions:

  • Simple modifications in surgeon preference and instrument utilization can significantly decrease robotic instrument costs.
  • Cost reduction strategies did not negatively impact intraoperative outcomes or patient safety.
  • The described cost-analysis framework is replicable by other institutions to manage long-term robotic surgery expenses.