Supplementary materials: Trends in adoption of knotless tissue control devices in robotic surgery

dataset

posted on 2025-03-17, 16:23 authored by Barbara H Johnson, Sinchana T, Stephen S. Johnston, Najmuddin J Gunja

These are peer-reviewed supplementary materials for the article 'Trends in adoption of knotless tissue control devices in robotic surgery' published in the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research.

Supplemental Figure 1A: Standardized Mean Differences Between Patient Cohorts Before and After Weighting: Colorectal Surgeries
Supplemental Figure 1B: Standardized Mean Differences Between Patient Cohorts Before and After Weighting: Total Hysterectomies
Supplemental Figure 1C: Standardized Mean Differences Between Patient Cohorts Before and After Weighting: Ventral Hernia Repairs
Supplemental Table 1: Provider and Procedure Characteristics

Aim: Trends in the use and comparative outcomes for barbed and conventional sutures have not been well-reported for robotic surgery. Materials & methods: This retrospective study used hospital discharge data in the US to assess suture use during robotic colorectal surgery (CR), total hysterectomy (TH) and ventral hernia repair (VHR) performed between 1 October 2015 and 30 June 2022. We first examined quarterly trends in use of barbed sutures, (specifically STRATAFIX™ knotless tissue control devices [KTCD]) and then compared clinical and economic outcomes between KTCD and conventional sutures. Outcomes included wound-related complications (infection/wound dehiscence) through 90 days post discharge, operating room (OR) time, hospital costs and 30/60/90 days readmissions. Propensity score weighting was used to address potential confounding in the comparisons of outcomes, performed separately for each procedure. Generalized linear models, accounting for hospital-level clustering, with link functions and error distributions tailored to the empirical distribution of outcomes were used to test for statistically significant differences in outcomes between the KTCD and conventional suture cohorts. Results: We identified 15,875 patients with CR (668 KTCD), 175,963 patients with TH (15,075 KTCD) and 32,469 patients with VHR (6776 KTCD). Over the study period, the proportion of robotic surgeries using KTCD tripled for CR (2.0–6.4%) and TH (2.9–10.4%) and more than doubled for VHR (12.2–25.3%). Compared with conventional sutures, KTCD was associated with significantly shorter OR time for TH (-19.1 min, 95% CI: [-30.2, -8.0]) and VHR (-17.3 min, 95% CI: [-31.4, -3.2]), and was numerically shorter, but did not reach statistical significance for CR (-23.2min 95% CI: [-48.1 to 1.7]). All other outcomes were similar between the two suture cohorts for all procedures, apart from CR 90-day readmissions, which were lower for the KTCD cohort (-2.8%, 95% CI: [-5.2 to -0.4%]). Conclusion: Adoption of KTCD has grown substantially over the past 6 years. While most clinical and economic outcomes were similar between the two groups, KTCD was associated with lower OR time versus conventional sutures for TH and VHR and lower 90-day readmissions for CR.