Literature DB >> 30484059

Nationwide outcomes and costs of laparoscopic and robotic vs. open hepatectomy.

Nicholas Cortolillo1, Chetan Patel2, Joshua Parreco2, Srinivas Kaza2, Alvaro Castillo2.   

Abstract

The safety of hepatectomy continues to improve and it holds a key role in the management of benign and malignant hepatic lesions. Laparoscopic and robotic approaches to hepatectomy are increasingly utilized. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes and costs of laparoscopic and robotic vs. open approaches to hepatectomy and to determine the national nonelective postoperative readmission rate, including readmission to other hospitals. The Nationwide Readmission Database from 2013 to 2014 was queried for all patients undergoing hepatectomy. Patients undergoing laparoscopic and robotic hepatectomies were compared to patients undergoing open hepatectomy. Multivariate logistic regression was implemented to determine the odds ratios (OR) for non-elective readmission within 45 days. There were 10,870 patients who underwent hepatectomy from 2013 to 2014 and 724 (6.7%) were approached with laparoscopic or robotic technique. The robotic cohort had lower mean cost of the index admission ($24,983 ± $18,329 vs. open $32,391 ± $31,983, p < 0.001, 95% CI - 18,292 to 534), shorter LOS (4.5 ± 3.8 vs. lap 6.8 ± 6.0 vs. open 7.6 ± 7.7 days, p < 0.01), and were less likely to be readmitted within 45 days (7.9% vs. 13.0% lap vs. 13.8% open, p = 0.05). The robotic cohort was slightly younger (mean age 57.5 ± 13.5 vs. lap 60.1 ± 13.8 vs. open 58.9 ± 13.7, p < 0.05), and no significant differences were seen by Charlson Comorbidity Index. Anastomosis of hepatic duct to GI tract carried higher odds of mortality (OR 2.87, p < 0.01) and higher odds of readmission (OR 1.40, p < 0.01). LOS above 7 days increased odds of readmission (OR 2.24, p < 0.01). Nearly one-fifth of patients readmitted after hepatectomy present to a different hospital. Robotic hepatectomy was associated with favorable cost and readmission outcomes compared to laparoscopic and open hepatectomy patients, despite similar patient comorbid burdens and patient's age. Length of stay over 7 days and anastomosis of hepatic duct to GI tract are strong risk factors for readmission and mortality.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Costs; Hepatectomy; Liver resection; Outcomes; Robotic surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30484059     DOI: 10.1007/s11701-018-0896-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Robot Surg        ISSN: 1863-2483


  6 in total

1.  Economic analysis of open versus laparoscopic versus robotic hepatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ioannis A Ziogas; Alexandros P Evangeliou; Konstantinos S Mylonas; Dimitrios I Athanasiadis; Panagiotis Cherouveim; David A Geller; Richard D Schulick; Sophoclis P Alexopoulos; Georgios Tsoulfas
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2021-03-19

Review 2.  Robotic gastrointestinal surgery: learning curve, educational programs and outcomes.

Authors:  Charles C Vining; Kinga B Skowron; Melissa E Hogg
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2021-01-23

Review 3.  Modern therapeutic approaches for the treatment of malignant liver tumours.

Authors:  Henrik Petrowsky; Ralph Fritsch; Matthias Guckenberger; Michelle L De Oliveira; Philipp Dutkowski; Pierre-Alain Clavien
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2020-07-17       Impact factor: 46.802

4.  Time to take another look at perceived disadvantages of robotic hepatectomy.

Authors:  Yasushi Hasegawa; Hiroyuki Nitta; Takeshi Takahara; Akira Sasaki
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 7.293

5.  Comparative clinical outcomes of robot-assisted liver resection versus laparoscopic liver resection: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lilong Zhang; Qihang Yuan; Yao Xu; Weixing Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-10-13       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Simultaneous Robot Assisted Colon and Liver Resection for Metastatic Colon Cancer.

Authors:  Matthew McGuirk; Mahir Gachabayov; Aram Rojas; Agon Kajmolli; Shekhar Gogna; Katie W Gu; Qian Qiuye; Xiang Da Dong
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2021 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.172

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.