Abstract:OBJECTIVE Preclinical studies suggest that robotic carotid artery stenting (CAS) could be superior to manual CAS. However, very limited comparative data exist for patients who have undergone robotic versus manual CAS. In addition, no data exist comparing the costs of manual and robotic CAS. METHODS All robotic CAS cases at two academic neurosurgery centers were retrospectively reviewed and 1:1 propensity matched with manual CAS cases. Personnel costs, supply costs, and total procedure costs were collected in collaboration with hospital administration by using time-driven activity-based cost analysis. RESULTS A total of 24 robotic CAS operations were performed between 2019 and 2023. Comorbidities and baseline procedural characteristics were well matched between robotic and manual cases. Unplanned manual conversion was observed in only 1 robotic case (4.2%). Robotic CAS complications and outcomes were comparable to manual. Robotic CAS was associated with a significantly increased fluoroscopy time (29.0 vs 19.2 minutes; p < 0.001). Robotic procedure time (88.9 ± 18.2 minutes) was significantly (p = 0.003) longer than manual time (68.72 ± 22.4 minutes). Health personnel costs ( 176.92 vs 233.39, p = 0.005); supply costs ( 421.20 vs 1030.26, p < 0.001); and total procedure costs ( 608.95 vs 1165.67, p < 0.001) were greater for robotic CAS. CONCLUSIONS In the first multicenter study and largest sample to date, the authors show that robotic CAS, with a low rate of procedural failure and postoperative complications, is safe and feasible. In addition, robotic CAS achieves comparable clinical outcomes to manual CAS. Robotic CAS was associated with increased fluoroscopy time, but fluoroscopy time decreased as operators gained familiarity with the CorPath GRX system. Robotic CAS was associated with a greater procedural cost, which was driven by greater personnel and supply costs. Robotic CAS failed to show superiority to manual CAS. These findings set a foundation for randomized controlled trials of robotic CAS, and also highlight the need for further studies to optimize robotic CAS and reduce its associated costs. OBJECTIVE Preclinical studies suggest that robotic carotid artery stenting (CAS) could be superior to manual CAS. However, very limited comparative data exist for patients who have undergone robotic versus manual CAS. In addition, no data exist comparing the costs of manual and robotic CAS. METHODS All robotic CAS cases at two academic neurosurgery centers were retrospectively reviewed and 1:1 propensity matched with manual CAS cases. Personnel costs, supply costs, and total procedure costs were collected in collaboration with hospital administration by using time-driven activity-based cost analysis. RESULTS A total of 24 robotic CAS operations were performed between 2019 and 2023. Comorbidities and baseline procedural characteristics were well matched between robotic and manual cases. Unplanned manual conversion was observed in only 1 robotic case (4.2%). Robotic CAS complications and outcomes were comparable to manual. Robotic CAS was associated with a significantly increased fluoroscopy time (29.0 vs 19.2 minutes; p < 0.001). Robotic procedure time (88.9 ± 18.2 minutes) was significantly (p = 0.003) longer than manual time (68.72 ± 22.4 minutes). Health personnel costs ( 176.92 vs 233.39, p = 0.005); supply costs ( 421.20 vs 1030.26, p < 0.001); and total procedure costs ( 608.95 vs 1165.67, p < 0.001) were greater for robotic CAS. CONCLUSIONS In the first multicenter study and largest sample to date, the authors show that robotic CAS, with a low rate of procedural failure and postoperative complications, is safe and feasible. In addition, robotic CAS achieves comparable clinical outcomes to manual CAS. Robotic CAS was associated with increased fluoroscopy time, but fluoroscopy time decreased as operators gained familiarity with the CorPath GRX system. Robotic CAS was associated with a greater procedural cost, which was driven by greater personnel and supply costs. Robotic CAS failed to show superiority to manual CAS. These findings set a foundation for randomized controlled trials of robotic CAS, and also highlight the need for further studies to optimize robotic CAS and reduce its associated costs.

Robotic assisted carotid artery stenting for the treatment of symptomatic carotid disease: technical feasibility and preliminary results

A Novel Endovascular Technique for Recanalization of Carotid Artery Chronic Total Occlusion: Staged Carotid Angioplasty and Stenting.

A technical guide to robotic-assisted carotid angioplasty and stenting with the Corindus CorPath GRX system

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Transradial Access for Carotid Artery Stenting

Robotic carotid artery stenting: a multicenter, propensity score–matched analysis of clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness

Feasibility of robot-assisted neuroendovascular procedures

Evaluation of Robotic-Assisted Carotid Artery Stenting in a Virtual Model Using Motion-Based Performance Metrics

Transradial/brachial carotid artery stenting with proximal protection: technical instructions, acute results and long-term outcomes

Robotic Diagnostic Cerebral Angiography: A Multicenter Experience of 113 Patients

Direct Cervical Carotid Angioplasty with Flow Reversal: A Single-Center Report from the Roadster Trial

Carotid Angioplasty and Stenting in Patients with High-Risk Carotid Stenosis

Safety of the transradial approach to carotid stenting

Early Outcomes after Carotid Angioplasty with Stenting Performed by Neurologists

A Prosthetic Conduit can be Used Safely for TransCarotid Artery Revascularization Under Local Anesthesia in High-Risk Patients

Carotid artery stenting for symptomatic carotid near occlusions: Feasibility, safety and outcome analysis

Radial and ulnar approach for carotid artery stenting with Roadsaver™ double layer micromesh stent: Early and long-term follow-up

Real time artificial intelligence assisted carotid artery stenting: a preliminary experience

First-in-human robotic percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main stenosis

Analysis of the ROADSTER pivotal and extended-access cohorts shows excellent 1-year durability of transcarotid stenting with dynamic flow reversal

Avoiding Complications with Transcarotid Artery Revascularization

Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) stenting or angioplasty for intracranial carotid artery stenosis: Case series and novel application