Rohun Bhagat1, Michael R Bronsert2, Austin N Ward3, Jeremiah Martin4, Elizabeth Juarez-Colunga5, Natalia O Glebova1, William G Henderson5, David Fullerton1, Michael J Weyant6, John D Mitchell6, Robert A Meguid7. 1. Surgical Outcomes and Applied Research Program (SOAR), University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado; Department of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado. 2. Surgical Outcomes and Applied Research Program (SOAR), University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado; Adult and Child Center for Health Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado. 3. Department of Surgery, University of Kentucky School of Medicine, Lexington, Kentucky. 4. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Southern Ohio Medical Center, Portsmouth, Ohio. 5. Surgical Outcomes and Applied Research Program (SOAR), University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado; Adult and Child Center for Health Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado; Department of Biostatistics and Informatics, Colorado School of Public Health, Aurora, Colorado. 6. Department of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado. 7. Surgical Outcomes and Applied Research Program (SOAR), University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado; Department of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado. Electronic address: robert.meguid@ucdenver.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hospital readmissions are viewed as a mark of inferior health care quality and are penalized. Unplanned postoperative readmission reason and timing after lung resection are not well understood. We examine related, unplanned readmissions after thoracoscopic versus open anatomic lung resections to identify opportunities to improve patient care. METHODS: We analyzed the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) data set, 2012 to 2015, characterizing 30-day related, unplanned postoperative readmissions after anatomic lung resections for primary lung cancer. Risk-adjusted comparison of readmission after thoracoscopic and open resection was performed using propensity matching. RESULTS: Patients (n = 9,510) underwent anatomic lung resections; 4,935 (51.9%) were thoracoscopic resections and 4,575 (48.1%) were open resections. Of the thoracoscopic patients, 10.9% experienced one or more complications, versus 19.4% of patients with open resection (p < 0.0001). Of the thoracoscopic patients 5.5% experienced related, unplanned readmissions versus 7.2% of the patients with open resection (p < 0.001). 24.8% of complications after thoracoscopic approach occurred after discharge, versus 15.5% after open approach (p < 0.0001). Timing of unplanned readmission was similar for both groups. The propensity-matched odds ratio of risk of readmission after thoracoscopic versus open resection was 1.16 (95% confidence interval, 0.949 to 1.411, p = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: Open anatomic lung resections for primary lung cancer had nearly twice the complication rate but only a slightly higher readmission rate than thoracoscopic resection. More complications occurred after discharge after thoracoscopic than open resections. Most readmissions occurred within 2 weeks after both thoracoscopic and open resections. Risk-adjusted comparison identified no statistically significant difference in risk of related, unplanned readmission after thoracoscopic versus open resections. Future studies should focus on identification of processes of care to decrease complications and unplanned readmissions after lung cancer resection.
BACKGROUND: Hospital readmissions are viewed as a mark of inferior health care quality and are penalized. Unplanned postoperative readmission reason and timing after lung resection are not well understood. We examine related, unplanned readmissions after thoracoscopic versus open anatomic lung resections to identify opportunities to improve patient care. METHODS: We analyzed the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) data set, 2012 to 2015, characterizing 30-day related, unplanned postoperative readmissions after anatomic lung resections for primary lung cancer. Risk-adjusted comparison of readmission after thoracoscopic and open resection was performed using propensity matching. RESULTS:Patients (n = 9,510) underwent anatomic lung resections; 4,935 (51.9%) were thoracoscopic resections and 4,575 (48.1%) were open resections. Of the thoracoscopic patients, 10.9% experienced one or more complications, versus 19.4% of patients with open resection (p < 0.0001). Of the thoracoscopic patients 5.5% experienced related, unplanned readmissions versus 7.2% of the patients with open resection (p < 0.001). 24.8% of complications after thoracoscopic approach occurred after discharge, versus 15.5% after open approach (p < 0.0001). Timing of unplanned readmission was similar for both groups. The propensity-matched odds ratio of risk of readmission after thoracoscopic versus open resection was 1.16 (95% confidence interval, 0.949 to 1.411, p = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: Open anatomic lung resections for primary lung cancer had nearly twice the complication rate but only a slightly higher readmission rate than thoracoscopic resection. More complications occurred after discharge after thoracoscopic than open resections. Most readmissions occurred within 2 weeks after both thoracoscopic and open resections. Risk-adjusted comparison identified no statistically significant difference in risk of related, unplanned readmission after thoracoscopic versus open resections. Future studies should focus on identification of processes of care to decrease complications and unplanned readmissions after lung cancer resection.
Authors: Sean M Stokes; Elliot Wakeam; Mara B Antonoff; Leah M Backhus; Robert A Meguid; David Odell; Thomas K Varghese Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2019-03 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: Adam R Dyas; Christina M Stuart; Brandon M Wojcik; Michael R Bronsert; Christopher D Scott; Robert A Meguid Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2022-06-07
Authors: Heloise Catho; Sebastien Guigard; Anne-Claire Toffart; Gil Frey; Thibaut Chollier; Pierre-Yves Brichon; Jean-François Roux; Linda Sakhri; Dominique Bertrand; Charles Aguirre; Sandy Gorain; Bernard Wuyam; François Arbib; Jean Christian Borel Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-02-10 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Gregory D Jones; Raul Caso; Kay See Tan; Joseph Dycoco; Prasad S Adusumilli; Manjit S Bains; Robert J Downey; James Huang; James M Isbell; Daniela Molena; Bernard J Park; Gaetano Rocco; Valerie W Rusch; Smita Sihag; David R Jones; Matthew J Bott Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 13.787