Minimum caseload for cost-effective robotic-assisted surgery: a systematic review

Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has been increasingly adopted across surgical specialties due to its potential clinical benefits. However, the high fixed and variable costs associated with robotic platforms raise concerns regarding economic sustainability. Procedural volume is frequently cited as a key determinant of cost-effectiveness; however, reported minimum caseload thresholds vary widely across surgical specialties, robotic platforms, and healthcare settings. This systematic review aims to synthesise the available evidence on cost-effectiveness thresholds and annual surgical volumes associated with the economic viability of the da Vinci and Mako robotic systems. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Two independent reviewers performed study selection and data extraction. Studies reporting minimum procedural volume thresholds and/or cost-effectiveness outcomes for da Vinci or Mako robotic systems were included. Results were synthesised descriptively and stratified by surgical specialty and robotic platform. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria, encompassing orthopaedic, urologic, colorectal, and head and neck surgery. Reported minimum procedural volume thresholds varied substantially, ranging from approximately 40 to 300 cases per year. This heterogeneity reflected differences in surgical specialty, robotic platform, study design, economic perspective, and underlying modelling assumptions. Across studies, high-volume centres were more consistently associated with favourable cost-effectiveness profiles, whereas findings in low- and intermediate-volume settings were highly variable and context dependent. The cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted surgery is strongly influenced by procedural volume but remains highly context dependent. No single minimum caseload threshold can be generalised across surgical specialties or robotic platforms. Reported volume thresholds should therefore be interpreted within specific clinical, organisational, and economic contexts when informing decisions regarding investment in robotic surgical systems.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Robotic Surgery
Published
2026-02-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-025-03122-6
Primary Topic
Surgical Simulation and Training
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Minimum caseload for cost-effective robotic-assisted surgery: a systematic review

Scott Leslie, J. Cotte, Kate Alexander, Kevin Fritz Arnaiz et al.
Journal of Robotic Surgery
Surgical Simulation and Training
article

Minimum caseload for cost-effective robotic-assisted surgery: a systematic review

Scott Leslie, J. Cotte, Kate Alexander, Kevin Fritz Arnaiz, Ruban Thanigasalam, Alice Bartolomeu Garavini, Ana Paula Drummond Lage, Leani Souza Maximo Pereira, Ana Clara de Carvalho Veludo, Daniel Steffens
article en

Abstract

Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has been increasingly adopted across surgical specialties due to its potential clinical benefits. However, the high fixed and variable costs associated with robotic platforms raise concerns regarding economic sustainability. Procedural volume is frequently cited as a key determinant of cost-effectiveness; however, reported minimum caseload thresholds vary widely across surgical specialties, robotic platforms, and healthcare settings. This systematic review aims to synthesise the available evidence on cost-effectiveness thresholds and annual surgical volumes associated with the economic viability of the da Vinci and Mako robotic systems. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Two independent reviewers performed study selection and data extraction. Studies reporting minimum procedural volume thresholds and/or cost-effectiveness outcomes for da Vinci or Mako robotic systems were included. Results were synthesised descriptively and stratified by surgical specialty and robotic platform. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria, encompassing orthopaedic, urologic, colorectal, and head and neck surgery. Reported minimum procedural volume thresholds varied substantially, ranging from approximately 40 to 300 cases per year. This heterogeneity reflected differences in surgical specialty, robotic platform, study design, economic perspective, and underlying modelling assumptions. Across studies, high-volume centres were more consistently associated with favourable cost-effectiveness profiles, whereas findings in low- and intermediate-volume settings were highly variable and context dependent. The cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted surgery is strongly influenced by procedural volume but remains highly context dependent. No single minimum caseload threshold can be generalised across surgical specialties or robotic platforms. Reported volume thresholds should therefore be interpreted within specific clinical, organisational, and economic contexts when informing decisions regarding investment in robotic surgical systems.

Journal of Robotic SurgeryVol. 20(1)
The University of Sydney (AU), New South Wales Department of Health (AU), Royal Prince Alfred Hospital (AU), Concord Repatriation General Hospital (AU), Chris O’Brien Lifehouse (AU), Faculdade de Ciências Médicas de Minas Gerais (BR)
Responsible consumption and production
Openalex Percentile: Top 68%
Surgical Simulation and Training
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.