Correction to: Cost Analysis of Robotic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass in a Single Academic Center: How Expensive Is Expensive?

Correction to: Obesity Surgery

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-020-04881-x

In the original article, due to a misplaced comma and decimal point, a number that was included in Table 2, as well as in the abstract and text, was off by a factor of ten. The correct Table 2, with the correct value of $1983.62 is shown below.

Table 2 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass cost per case

Additionally, the incorrect value was copied into the abstract and text. The Results section in the abstract, with the corrected value of $1983.62, is below:

Results

We found no difference in primary or secondary outcomes following R-RYGB and L-RYGB. The overall cost for R-RYGB and L-RYGB was not statistically different (median total cost for R-RYGB and L-RYBG was $6431.34 and $6349.09, P > 0.05, respectively). Operating time cost was significantly higher for R-RYGB compared with L-RYGB ($2248.51 versus $1983.62, respectively, P < 0.0001, respectively). R-RYGB had lower cost of supplies as well as a shorter length of stay compared with L-RYGB (mean 1.5 versus 1.7 days, respectively). The same value is incorrectly entered under the Primary Outcomes section. The corrected value of $1983.62 is shown below:

Overall, there were no statistically significant cost differences between R-RYGB and L-RYGB. Total median cost for R-RYGB was $6431.34 versus $6349.09 for L-RYGB (P > 0 .05) (Table 2). Although hospital LOS was shorter for R-RYGB (mean 1.5 versus 1.7 days), the cost difference was not statistically significant (Table 2). R-RYGB operative time was longer than L-RYGB (mean 188 versus 143 mins, respectively) resulting in a significantly higher operating room time costs (median $2248.51 versus $1983.62, respectively, P < 0 .0001) (Table 2). The cost of supplies for R-RYGB was significantly less than L-RYGB (median $3453.34 versus $3707.58, respectively, P = 0 .007) (Table 2).

One number in the Subgroup Analysis was incorrectly entered. The correct value of $6221.75 is shown below.

Further analysis of the type of robotic platform used in R-RYGB compared to L-RYGB performed during the same time period demonstrated no statistically significant cost differences between the two groups whether the da Vinci Xi platform or the da Vinci Si platform was used (Table 4). Overall cost of R-RYGB on the Xi platform was lower than the Si platform (median $6412.36 versus $6739.96, respectively) (Table 4).Additionally, when the cost of R-RYGB based on the type of robotic stapler was compared to the cost of L-RYGB performed during the same time period, there again was no significant difference between the groups (Table 5). Both the EndoWrist® 45 mm stapler and the SureForm™ 60 mm stapler were used with the da Vinci Xi platform. There was no significant difference between the cost of R-RYGB when the EndoWrist® 45 mm stapler or the SureForm™ 60 mm stapler was used (median $6563.82 versus $6221.75, respectively) (Table 5).