Stacy J Kowalsky1, Mazen S Zenati2, Jennifer Steve1, Stephen A Esper3, Kenneth K Lee1, Melissa E Hogg1, Herbert J Zeh1, Amer H Zureikat1. 1. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA. 2. Division of Biostatistics, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA. 3. Department of Anesthesiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway implementation on outcomes, and cost of robotic and open pancreatoduodenectomy. BACKGROUND: ERAS pathways have shown benefit in open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD). The impact of ERAS on robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) is unknown. METHODS: Retrospective review of consecutive RPD and OPDs in the pre-ERAS (July, 2014-July, 2015) and ERAS (July, 2015-July, 2016) period. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was used to determine impact of ERAS and operative approach alone, or in combination (pre-ERAS + OPD, pre-ERAS + RPD, ERAS + OPD, ERAS + RPD) on length of hospital stay (LOS) and overall cost. RESULTS: In all, 254 consecutive pancreatoduodenectomies (RPD 62%, OPD 38%) were analyzed (median age 67, 47% female). ERAS patients had shorter LOS (6 vs 8 days; P = 0.004) and decreased overall cost (USD 20,362 vs 24,277; P = 0.001) compared with non-ERAS patients, whereas RPD was associated with decreased LOS (7 vs 8 days; P = 0.0001) and similar cost compared with OPD. On multivariable analysis (MVA), RPD was predictive of shorter LOS [odds ratio (OR) 0.33, confidence interval (CI) 0.16-0.67, P = 0.002), whereas ERAS was protective against high cost (OR 0.57, CI 0.33-0.97, P = 0.037). On MVA, when combining operative approach with ERAS pathway use, a combined ERAS + RPD approach was associated with reduced LOS and optimal cost compared with other combinations (pre-ERAS + OPD, pre-ERAS + RPD, ERAS + OPD). CONCLUSION: ERAS implementation is independently associated with cost savings for pancreatoduodenectomy. A combination of ERAS and robotic approach synergistically decreases hospital stay and overall cost compared with other strategies.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway implementation on outcomes, and cost of robotic and open pancreatoduodenectomy. BACKGROUND: ERAS pathways have shown benefit in open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD). The impact of ERAS on robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) is unknown. METHODS: Retrospective review of consecutive RPD and OPDs in the pre-ERAS (July, 2014-July, 2015) and ERAS (July, 2015-July, 2016) period. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was used to determine impact of ERAS and operative approach alone, or in combination (pre-ERAS + OPD, pre-ERAS + RPD, ERAS + OPD, ERAS + RPD) on length of hospital stay (LOS) and overall cost. RESULTS: In all, 254 consecutive pancreatoduodenectomies (RPD 62%, OPD 38%) were analyzed (median age 67, 47% female). ERAS patients had shorter LOS (6 vs 8 days; P = 0.004) and decreased overall cost (USD 20,362 vs 24,277; P = 0.001) compared with non-ERAS patients, whereas RPD was associated with decreased LOS (7 vs 8 days; P = 0.0001) and similar cost compared with OPD. On multivariable analysis (MVA), RPD was predictive of shorter LOS [odds ratio (OR) 0.33, confidence interval (CI) 0.16-0.67, P = 0.002), whereas ERAS was protective against high cost (OR 0.57, CI 0.33-0.97, P = 0.037). On MVA, when combining operative approach with ERAS pathway use, a combined ERAS + RPD approach was associated with reduced LOS and optimal cost compared with other combinations (pre-ERAS + OPD, pre-ERAS + RPD, ERAS + OPD). CONCLUSION: ERAS implementation is independently associated with cost savings for pancreatoduodenectomy. A combination of ERAS and robotic approach synergistically decreases hospital stay and overall cost compared with other strategies.
Authors: MaryJoe K Rice; Jacob C Hodges; Johanna Bellon; Jeffrey Borrebach; Amr I Al Abbas; Ahmad Hamad; L Mark Knab; A James Moser; Amer H Zureikat; Herbert J Zeh; Melissa E Hogg Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Carl R Schmidt; Britney R Harris; Kelsey A Musgrove; Pavan Rao; J Wallis Marsh; Alan A Thomay; Melissa E Hogg; Herbert J Zeh; Amer H Zureikat; Brian A Boone Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2020-11-02 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Amer H Zureikat; Joal D Beane; Mazen S Zenati; Amr I Al Abbas; Brian A Boone; A James Moser; David L Bartlett; Melissa E Hogg; Herbert J Zeh Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2021-05-01 Impact factor: 13.787