Granular analysis reveals smart insufflation to be operationally more efficient and financially net positive compared to traditional insufflation for laparoscopic surgery

Introduction Smart insufflation (SI) techniques relying on valve and membrane-free insufflation are increasing in usage. Although considerable literature exists demonstrating the benefits of SI on procedural ease and patient outcomes, there remains a paucity describing the financial impact of these devices. The purpose of this study was to determine the financial and efficiency impact of these devices on the operating room (OR) and inpatient wards of a hospital. Methods A discrete event simulation model representing a typical mid-sized North American hospital comparing SI to TI was generated. The National Surgical Quality Improvement (NSQIP) database from 2015 to 2019 was used to populate the model with data supplemented from literature. Outcomes included length of stay (LOS), duration of surgery (DOS), annual procedure volume, profit, return on investment (ROI), and gross profit margin (GPM). Results The operational parameters demonstrating favorability of SI to TI were DOS and LOS. DOS savings were 10-32 minutes/case while LOS savings were 0-3 days/case. Implementation of an SI led to an increase in annual throughput of 148 cases (12%). LOS decreased by 189 days (19%). This resulted in an increase in net profit of $104,675 per annum. The ROI of SI over TI device was >1000%. Conclusion Despite the initial financial investment being greater, the implementation of SI offsets these expenses and yields significant financial benefits. Our study demonstrates the financial benefits of SI over TI and illustrates how granular operational and financial analysis of technologies are essential to aid in sound healthcare procurement decision making. ### Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. ### Clinical Trial NA ### Funding Statement Research funding to conduct this study was provided by a research innovation grant provided by ConMed Corporation (#IRB 22-0113-C). These funds were used for student researcher remuneration, software, and manuscript dissemination. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: Mount Sinai Hospital Research Ethics Board Committee 700 University Avenue, 8th fl., Suite 8-600 Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5G 1Z5 t: (416) 586-4875 f: (416) 586-4715 www.mtsinai.on.ca I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable. Yes Data used in this study can be found in this manuscript as well as the American Academy of Surgery (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database.