Literature DB >> 24041555

Short-term outcomes for robotic colorectal surgery by provider volume.

Deborah S Keller1, Lobat Hashemi, Minyi Lu, Conor P Delaney.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There has been a rapid increase in robotic colorectal surgery. Benefits of this technology are unclear and being investigated. However, differences in outcomes between centers have not been evaluated. Our aim was to evaluate outcomes for robotic colorectal procedures by surgeon and hospital volume. STUDY
DESIGN: A national inpatient database was reviewed for robotic colorectal resections performed during an 18-month period. Hospitals and surgeons were stratified into high, average, and low case volumes based on a normal distribution scale. High, average, and low volume was defined as ≤ 10, 11 to 20, and >20, respectively, for hospitals, and ≤ 5, 6 to 15, and >15, respectively, for surgeons. Short-term outcomes and hospital cost were evaluated.
RESULTS: There were 1,428 robotic colorectal cases across 123 hospitals and 411 surgeons evaluated. Only 13% (n = 16) of hospitals and 4.4% (n = 18) of surgeons performed a high volume of robotic colorectal cases. Lower volume was associated with significantly more overall complications (p < 0.001; p < 0.001), longer length of stay (p = 0.005; p < 0.001), and higher cost (p < 0.001; p < 0.001) at the hospital and surgeon level, respectively. High-volume hospitals and surgeons had significantly lower rates of postoperative bleeding (p < 0.001; p < 0.001) and ileus (p = 0.003; p = 0.0014).
CONCLUSIONS: Lower-volume providers, who are performing the majority of procedures, are generating more complications, longer hospital lengths of stay, and higher costs of care. These results have a negative impact on quality outcomes measures for those facilities. Although surgeons and hospitals continue to selectively explore robotics, this should be limited to high volume and interested surgeons and hospitals to offer high-quality outcomes to patients.
Copyright © 2013 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24041555     DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.07.390

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Surg        ISSN: 1072-7515            Impact factor:   6.113


  9 in total

Review 1.  Dealing with robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer: Current status and perspectives.

Authors:  Roberto Biffi; Fabrizio Luca; Paolo Pietro Bianchi; Sabina Cenciarelli; Wanda Petz; Igor Monsellato; Manuela Valvo; Maria Laura Cossu; Tiago Leal Ghezzi; Kassem Shmaissany
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 5.742

2.  Single-incision robotic colectomy: are costs prohibitive?

Authors:  John C Byrn; Jennifer E Hrabe; John G Armstrong; Christopher A Anthony; Mary E Charlton
Journal:  Int J Med Robot       Date:  2015-04-22       Impact factor: 2.547

3.  European Association of Endoscopic Surgeons (EAES) consensus statement on the use of robotics in general surgery.

Authors:  Amir Szold; Roberto Bergamaschi; Ivo Broeders; Jenny Dankelman; Antonello Forgione; Thomas Langø; Andreas Melzer; Yoav Mintz; Salvador Morales-Conde; Michael Rhodes; Richard Satava; Chung-Ngai Tang; Ramon Vilallonga
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-11-08       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Medium-term adoption trends for laparoscopic, robotic and transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) techniques.

Authors:  G Pellino; J Warusavitarne
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2017-11-16       Impact factor: 3.781

Review 5.  Augmented Reality: Moving Robotics Forward.

Authors:  Nadine Hachach-Haram; Danilo Miskovic
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2021-09-03

6.  Effect of Robotic-Assisted vs Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery on Risk of Conversion to Open Laparotomy Among Patients Undergoing Resection for Rectal Cancer: The ROLARR Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  David Jayne; Alessio Pigazzi; Helen Marshall; Julie Croft; Neil Corrigan; Joanne Copeland; Phil Quirke; Nick West; Tero Rautio; Niels Thomassen; Henry Tilney; Mark Gudgeon; Paolo Pietro Bianchi; Richard Edlin; Claire Hulme; Julia Brown
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 7.  Education and Training in Transanal Endoscopic Surgery and Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision.

Authors:  Deborah S Keller; F Borja de Lacy; Roel Hompes
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2021-03-31

8.  Impact of surgeon and hospital factors on length of stay after colorectal surgery systematic review.

Authors:  Zubair Bayat; Keegan Guidolin; Basheer Elsolh; Charmaine De Castro; Erin Kennedy; Anand Govindarajan
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2022-09-02

Review 9.  Laparoscopic and robotic total mesorectal excision in the treatment of rectal cancer. Brief review and personal remarks.

Authors:  Paolo Pietro Bianchi; Wanda Petz; Fabrizio Luca; Roberto Biffi; Giuseppe Spinoglio; Marco Montorsi
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2014-05-06       Impact factor: 6.244

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.