• Something wrong with this record ?

Outcomes of robotic-assisted versus open radical cystectomy in a large-scale, contemporary cohort of bladder cancer patients

B. Hoeh, RS. Flammia, L. Hohenhorst, G. Sorce, F. Chierigo, A. Panunzio, Z. Tian, F. Saad, M. Gallucci, A. Briganti, C. Terrone, SF. Shariat, M. Graefen, D. Tilki, A. Antonelli, LA. Kluth, A. Becker, FKH. Chun, PI. Karakiewicz

. 2022 ; 126 (4) : 830-837. [pub] 20220604

Language English Country United States

Document type Journal Article

Persistent link   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc22024629

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To test for differences in perioperative outcomes and total hospital costs (THC) in nonmetastatic bladder cancer patients undergoing open (ORC) versus robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC). METHODS: We relied on the National Inpatient Sample database (2016-2019). Statistics consisted of trend analyses, multivariable logistic, Poisson, and linear regression models. RESULTS: Of 5280 patients, 1876 (36%) versus 3200 (60%) underwent RARC versus ORC. RARC increased from 32% to 41% (estimated annual percentage change [EAPC]: + 8.6%; p = 0.02). Rates of transfusion (8% vs. 16%), intraoperative (2% vs. 3%), wound (6% vs. 10%), and pulmonary (6% vs. 10%) complications were lower in RARC patients (all p < 0.05). Moreover, median length of stay (LOS) was shorter in RARC (6 vs. 7days; p < 0.001). Conversely, median THC (31,486 vs. 27,162$; p < 0.001) were higher in RARC. Multivariable logistic regression-derived odds ratios addressing transfusion (0.49), intraoperative (0.53), wound (0.68), and pulmonary (0.71) complications favored RARC (all p < 0.01). In multivariable Poisson and linear regression models, RARC was associated with shorter LOS (Rate ratio:0.86; p < 0.001), yet higher THC (Coef.:5,859$; p < 0.001). RARC in-hospital mortality was lower (1% vs. 2%; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: RARC complications, LOS, and mortality appear more favorable than ORC, but result in higher THC. The favorable RARC profile contributes to its increasing popularity throughout the United States.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc22024629
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20221031101017.0
007      
ta
008      
221017s2022 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1002/jso.26973 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)35661361
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Hoeh, Benedikt $u Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada $1 https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000000242386584
245    10
$a Outcomes of robotic-assisted versus open radical cystectomy in a large-scale, contemporary cohort of bladder cancer patients / $c B. Hoeh, RS. Flammia, L. Hohenhorst, G. Sorce, F. Chierigo, A. Panunzio, Z. Tian, F. Saad, M. Gallucci, A. Briganti, C. Terrone, SF. Shariat, M. Graefen, D. Tilki, A. Antonelli, LA. Kluth, A. Becker, FKH. Chun, PI. Karakiewicz
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To test for differences in perioperative outcomes and total hospital costs (THC) in nonmetastatic bladder cancer patients undergoing open (ORC) versus robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC). METHODS: We relied on the National Inpatient Sample database (2016-2019). Statistics consisted of trend analyses, multivariable logistic, Poisson, and linear regression models. RESULTS: Of 5280 patients, 1876 (36%) versus 3200 (60%) underwent RARC versus ORC. RARC increased from 32% to 41% (estimated annual percentage change [EAPC]: + 8.6%; p = 0.02). Rates of transfusion (8% vs. 16%), intraoperative (2% vs. 3%), wound (6% vs. 10%), and pulmonary (6% vs. 10%) complications were lower in RARC patients (all p < 0.05). Moreover, median length of stay (LOS) was shorter in RARC (6 vs. 7days; p < 0.001). Conversely, median THC (31,486 vs. 27,162$; p < 0.001) were higher in RARC. Multivariable logistic regression-derived odds ratios addressing transfusion (0.49), intraoperative (0.53), wound (0.68), and pulmonary (0.71) complications favored RARC (all p < 0.01). In multivariable Poisson and linear regression models, RARC was associated with shorter LOS (Rate ratio:0.86; p < 0.001), yet higher THC (Coef.:5,859$; p < 0.001). RARC in-hospital mortality was lower (1% vs. 2%; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: RARC complications, LOS, and mortality appear more favorable than ORC, but result in higher THC. The favorable RARC profile contributes to its increasing popularity throughout the United States.
650    _2
$a cystektomie $x škodlivé účinky $7 D015653
650    _2
$a tetrahydrokanabinol $7 D013759
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a pooperační komplikace $x etiologie $7 D011183
650    12
$a roboticky asistované výkony $7 D065287
650    _2
$a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
650    _2
$a močový měchýř $7 D001743
650    12
$a nádory močového měchýře $7 D001749
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Flammia, Rocco S $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada $u Department of Maternal-Child and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Rome, Italy $1 https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000000231290544
700    1_
$a Hohenhorst, Lukas $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada $u Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Sorce, Gabriele $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada $u Division of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
700    1_
$a Chierigo, Francesco $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada $u Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy
700    1_
$a Panunzio, Andrea $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada $u Department of Urology, University of Verona, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata di Verona, Verona, Italy
700    1_
$a Tian, Zhe $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
700    1_
$a Saad, Fred $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
700    1_
$a Gallucci, Michele $u Department of Maternal-Child and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Rome, Italy
700    1_
$a Briganti, Alberto $u Division of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
700    1_
$a Terrone, Carlo $u Department of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy
700    1_
$a Shariat, Shahrokh F $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $u Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA $u Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, Texas, USA $u Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic $u Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia $u Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
700    1_
$a Graefen, Markus $u Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Tilki, Derya $u Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany $u Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany $u Department of Urology, Koc University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
700    1_
$a Antonelli, Alessandro $u Department of Urology, University of Verona, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata di Verona, Verona, Italy
700    1_
$a Kluth, Luis A $u Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
700    1_
$a Becker, Andreas $u Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
700    1_
$a Chun, Felix K H $u Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
700    1_
$a Karakiewicz, Pierre I $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
773    0_
$w MED00010662 $t Journal of surgical oncology $x 1096-9098 $g Roč. 126, č. 4 (2022), s. 830-837
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35661361 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20221017 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20221031101014 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1854389 $s 1175919
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2022 $b 126 $c 4 $d 830-837 $e 20220604 $i 1096-9098 $m Journal of surgical oncology $n J Surg Oncol $x MED00010662
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20221017

Find record

Citation metrics

Archiving options