Pierluigi Novellis1, Edoardo Bottoni1, Emanuele Voulaz1, Umberto Cariboni1, Alberto Testori1, Luca Bertolaccini2, Laura Giordano3, Elisa Dieci1, Lorenzo Granato4, Elena Vanni4,5, Marco Montorsi5,6, Marco Alloisio1,5, Giulia Veronesi1. 1. Division of Thoracic Surgery, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Rozzano, Milan, Italy. 2. Department of Thoracic Surgery, Maggiore Teaching Hospital, Bologna, Italy. 3. Division of Biostatistics, Department of Oncology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Rozzano, Milan, Italy. 4. Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Business Operating Officer, Rozzano, Milan, Italy. 5. Department of Biomedical Science, Humanitas University, Rozzano, Milan, Italy. 6. Division of General Surgery, Humanitas Clinical and Research center, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery is increasingly used to resect lung cancer. However costs are high. We compared costs and outcomes for robotic surgery, video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS), and open surgery, to treat non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: We retrospectively assessed 103 consecutive patients given lobectomy or segmentectomy for clinical stage I or II NSCLC. Three surgeons could choose VATS or open, the fourth could choose between all three techniques. Between-group differences were assessed by Fisher's exact, two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test. P values <0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were treated by robot, 41 by VATS, and 39 by open surgery. Age, physical status, pulmonary function, comorbidities, stage, and perioperative complications did not differ between the groups. Pathological tumor size was greater in the open than VATS and robotic groups (P=0.025). Duration of surgery was 150, 191 and 116 minutes, by robotic, VATS and open approaches, respectively (P<0.001). Significantly more lymph node stations were removed (P<0.001), and median length of stay was shorter (4, 5 and 6 days, respectively; P<0.001) in the robotic than VATS and open groups. Estimated costs were 82%, 68% and 69%, respectively, of the regional health service reimbursement for robotic, VATS and open approaches. DISCUSSION: Robotic surgery for early lung cancer was associated with shorter stay and more extensive lymph node dissection than VATS and open surgery. Duration of surgery was shorter for robotic than VATS. Although the cost of robotic thoracic surgery is high, the hospital makes a profit.
BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery is increasingly used to resect lung cancer. However costs are high. We compared costs and outcomes for robotic surgery, video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS), and open surgery, to treat non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: We retrospectively assessed 103 consecutive patients given lobectomy or segmentectomy for clinical stage I or II NSCLC. Three surgeons could choose VATS or open, the fourth could choose between all three techniques. Between-group differences were assessed by Fisher's exact, two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test. P values <0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were treated by robot, 41 by VATS, and 39 by open surgery. Age, physical status, pulmonary function, comorbidities, stage, and perioperative complications did not differ between the groups. Pathological tumor size was greater in the open than VATS and robotic groups (P=0.025). Duration of surgery was 150, 191 and 116 minutes, by robotic, VATS and open approaches, respectively (P<0.001). Significantly more lymph node stations were removed (P<0.001), and median length of stay was shorter (4, 5 and 6 days, respectively; P<0.001) in the robotic than VATS and open groups. Estimated costs were 82%, 68% and 69%, respectively, of the regional health service reimbursement for robotic, VATS and open approaches. DISCUSSION: Robotic surgery for early lung cancer was associated with shorter stay and more extensive lymph node dissection than VATS and open surgery. Duration of surgery was shorter for robotic than VATS. Although the cost of robotic thoracic surgery is high, the hospital makes a profit.
Entities:
Keywords:
Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); costs; lobectomy open surgery; robotic surgery; thoracoscopic surgery; video-assisted surgery
Authors: Franca M A Melfi; Gian Franco Menconi; A Massimo Mariani; Carlo Alberto Angeletti Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: Giulia Veronesi; Domenico Galetta; Patrick Maisonneuve; Franca Melfi; Ralph Alexander Schmid; Alessandro Borri; Fernando Vannucci; Lorenzo Spaggiari Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2009-12-28 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Shaun A Deen; Jennifer L Wilson; Candice L Wilshire; Eric Vallières; Alexander S Farivar; Ralph W Aye; Robson E Ely; Brian E Louie Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2014-01-28 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Hao-Xian Yang; Kaitlin M Woo; Camelia S Sima; Manjit S Bains; Prasad S Adusumilli; James Huang; David J Finley; Nabil P Rizk; Valerie W Rusch; David R Jones; Bernard J Park Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Scott J Swanson; Daniel L Miller; Robert Joseph McKenna; John Howington; M Blair Marshall; Andrew C Yoo; Matthew Moore; Candace L Gunnarsson; Bryan F Meyers Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2013-11-08 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Brian E Louie; Jennifer L Wilson; Sunghee Kim; Robert J Cerfolio; Bernard J Park; Alexander S Farivar; Eric Vallières; Ralph W Aye; William R Burfeind; Mark I Block Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2016-05-19 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Anastasia Jermihov; Liwei Chen; Maria F Echavarria; Emily P Ng; Frank O Velez; Carla C Moodie; Joseph R Garrett; Jacques P Fontaine; Eric M Toloza Journal: Cureus Date: 2022-06-22
Authors: Monica Casiraghi; Alessio Vincenzo Mariolo; Shehab Mohamed; Giulia Sedda; Patrick Maisonneuve; Antonio Mazzella; Giorgio Lo Iacono; Francesco Petrella; Lorenzo Spaggiari Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-06-11 Impact factor: 4.964