Rohun Bhagat1, Michael R Bronsert2, William G Henderson3, Christopher D Scott4, Michael J Weyant4, John D Mitchell4, David A Fullerton1, Robert A Meguid5. 1. Surgical Outcomes and Applied Research Program, 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, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado; Adult and Child Consortium for Health Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado. 3. Surgical Outcomes and Applied Research Program, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado; Adult and Child Consortium 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. 4. Department of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado. 5. Surgical Outcomes and Applied Research Program, 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: Patients express strong opinion regarding discharge destination, preferring discharge home vs elsewhere. As focus on patient satisfaction increases, we sought to understand differences in postoperative discharge destination after minimally invasive vs open anatomic lung resection for lung cancer to guide patient education and management and better understand the postoperative patient experience. METHODS: Procedures were identified by Current Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Diseases codes using the 2012-2017 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program dataset. Propensity score analysis was used to assess the relationship between the surgical approach and nonhome discharge destination (primary outcome) and postoperative complications; related, unplanned readmission; and mortality (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: A total of 17,303 patients underwent anatomic lung resection for lung cancer, including 10,121 (58.5%) minimally invasive and 7182 (41.5%) open resections. Patients undergoing open resection had 60% greater odds of nonhome discharge (P < .001), 58% greater odds of postoperative mortality (P = .003), 36% greater odds of postoperative complication (P < .001), and 17% greater odds of readmission (P = .04) compared with patients undergoing minimally invasive resection. CONCLUSIONS: The minimally invasive approach to lung resection for lung cancer offers patients a more desirable patient-centered postoperative experience, as well as more favorable clinical outcomes, and should be favored when feasible.
BACKGROUND:Patients express strong opinion regarding discharge destination, preferring discharge home vs elsewhere. As focus on patient satisfaction increases, we sought to understand differences in postoperative discharge destination after minimally invasive vs open anatomic lung resection for lung cancer to guide patient education and management and better understand the postoperative patient experience. METHODS: Procedures were identified by Current Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Diseases codes using the 2012-2017 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program dataset. Propensity score analysis was used to assess the relationship between the surgical approach and nonhome discharge destination (primary outcome) and postoperative complications; related, unplanned readmission; and mortality (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: A total of 17,303 patients underwent anatomic lung resection for lung cancer, including 10,121 (58.5%) minimally invasive and 7182 (41.5%) open resections. Patients undergoing open resection had 60% greater odds of nonhome discharge (P < .001), 58% greater odds of postoperative mortality (P = .003), 36% greater odds of postoperative complication (P < .001), and 17% greater odds of readmission (P = .04) compared with patients undergoing minimally invasive resection. CONCLUSIONS: The minimally invasive approach to lung resection for lung cancer offers patients a more desirable patient-centered postoperative experience, as well as more favorable clinical outcomes, and should be favored when feasible.
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