Introducing the E100: will the improvement make a significant difference? Financial analysis based on sleeve...

Robotic-assisted surgery has been shown to offer significant benefits for both patients and surgeons. However, the high cost of the equipment remains a major barrier to its widespread adoption in the medical field. To ensure cost-effectiveness of these procedures, it is important to implement strategies that can help reduce the costs involved. One potential strategy to reduce costs is to compare the performance of different generators used in these procedures. In this study, we compared the performance of two generators: the E100 (Intuitive Surgical, Inc.) and the ERBE VIO dV 2.0 (Elektromedizin GmbH). The analysis focused on several key metrics, including the number of times the generators were activated, the average time per seal, total sealing time, and console time. The financial impact of transitioning to the E100 was also evaluated based on annual volume. We analyzed a total of 1457 sleeve gastrectomies, with 746 performed using the ERBE generator and 711 performed using the E100. There were no significant differences in preoperative BMI or bleeding complication rates between the two groups. The average activation of the generator per case was similar in both groups. However, the sealing time was 42.3% lower, and the average console time was 8 min shorter in cases where the E100 was used. Based on our financial analysis, transitioning to the E100 generator would result in cost savings of approximately $33-$34 K per year. This suggests that introducing the new generator is a successful strategy for reducing costs associated with robotic-assisted procedures.