1
|
Hobeika C, Pfister M, Geller D, Tsung A, Chan A, Troisi RI, Rela M, Di Benedetto F, Sucandy I, Nagakawa Y, Walsh RM, Kooby D, Barkun J, Soubrane O, Clavien PA. Recommendations on Robotic Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery. The Paris Jury-Based Consensus Conference. Ann Surg 2025; 281:136-153. [PMID: 38787528 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000006365] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/25/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To establish the first consensus guidelines on the safety and indications of robotics in Hepato-Pancreatic-Biliary (HPB) surgery. The secondary aim was to identify priorities for future research. BACKGROUND HPB robotic surgery is reaching the IDEAL 2b exploration phase for innovative technology. An objective assessment endorsed by the HPB community is timely and needed. METHODS The ROBOT4HPB conference developed consensus guidelines using the Zurich-Danish model. An impartial and multidisciplinary jury produced unbiased guidelines based on the work of 10 expert panels answering predefined key questions and considering the best-quality evidence retrieved after a systematic review. The recommendations conformed with the GRADE and SIGN50 methodologies. RESULTS Sixty-four experts from 20 countries considered 285 studies, and the conference included an audience of 220 attendees. The jury (n=10) produced recommendations or statements covering 5 sections of robotic HPB surgery: technology, training and expertise, outcome assessment, and liver and pancreatic procedures. The recommendations supported the feasibility of robotics for most HPB procedures and its potential value in extending minimally invasive indications, emphasizing, however, the importance of expertise to ensure safety. The concept of expertise was defined broadly, encompassing requirements for credentialing HPB robotics at a given center. The jury prioritized relevant questions for future trials and emphasized the need for prospective registries, including validated outcome metrics for the forthcoming assessment of HPB robotics. CONCLUSIONS The ROBOT4HPB consensus represents a collaborative and multidisciplinary initiative, defining state-of-the-art expertise in HPB robotics procedures. It produced the first guidelines to encourage their safe use and promotion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christian Hobeika
- Department of Hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery and Liver transplantation, Beaujon Hospital, AP-HP, Clichy, Paris-Cité University, Paris, France
| | - Matthias Pfister
- Department of Surgery and Transplantation, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Wyss Zurich Translational Center, ETH Zurich and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - David Geller
- Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Allan Tsung
- Department of Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Albert Chan
- Department of Surgery, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Hong Kong, 102 Pok Fu Lam Road, Hong Kong, China
| | - Roberto Ivan Troisi
- Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, Division of HBP, Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery, Transplantation Service, Federico II University Hospital, Naples, Italy
| | - Mohamed Rela
- The Institute of Liver Disease and Transplantation, Dr. Rela Institute and Medical Centre, Chennai, India
| | - Fabrizio Di Benedetto
- Hepato-pancreato-biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation Unit, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy
| | - Iswanto Sucandy
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Digestive Health Institute AdventHealth Tampa, Tampa, FL
| | - Yuichi Nagakawa
- Department of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - R Matthew Walsh
- Department of General Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Digestive Diseases and Surgery Institution, OH
| | - David Kooby
- Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA
| | - Jeffrey Barkun
- Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Olivier Soubrane
- Department of Digestive, Metabolic and Oncologic Surgery, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, University René Descartes Paris 5, Paris, France
| | - Pierre-Alain Clavien
- Department of Surgery and Transplantation, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Wyss Zurich Translational Center, ETH Zurich and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Branger N, Doumerc N, Waeckel T, Bigot P, Surlemont L, Knipper S, Pignot G, Audenet F, Bruyère F, Fontenil A, Parier B, Champy C, Rouprêt M, Patard JJ, Henon F, Fiard G, Guillotreau J, Beauval JB, Michel C, Bernardeau S, Taha F, Mallet R, Panthier F, Guy L, Vignot L, Khene ZE, Bernhard JC. Preparing for the Worst: Management and Predictive Factors of Open Conversion During Minimally Invasive Renal Tumor Surgery (UroCCR-135 Study). EUR UROL SUPPL 2024; 63:89-95. [PMID: 38585592 PMCID: PMC10997889 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2024.03.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/15/2024] [Indexed: 04/09/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and objective Data regarding open conversion (OC) during minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for renal tumors are reported from big databases, without precise description of the reason and management of OC. The objective of this study was to describe the rate, reasons, and perioperative outcomes of OC in a cohort of patients who underwent MIS for renal tumor initially. The secondary objective was to find the factors associated with OC. Methods Between 2008 and 2022, of the 8566 patients included in the UroCCR project prospective database (NCT03293563), who underwent laparoscopic or robot-assisted minimally invasive partial (MIPN) or radical (MIRN) nephrectomy, 163 experienced OC. Each center was contacted to enlighten the context of OC: "emergency OC" implied an immediate life-threatening situation not reasonably manageable with MIS, otherwise "elective OC". To evaluate the predictive factors of OC, a 2:1 paired cohort on the UroCCR database was used. Key findings and limitations The incidence rate of OC was 1.9% for all cases of MIS, 2.9% for MIRN, and 1.4% for MIPN. OC procedures were mostly elective (82.2%). The main reason for OC was a failure to progress due to anatomical difficulties (42.9%). Five patients (3.1%) died within 90 d after surgery. Increased body mass index (BMI; odds ratio [OR]: 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.09, p = 0.009) and cT stage (OR: 2.22, 95% CI: 1.24-4.25, p = 0.008) were independent predictive factors of OC. Conclusions and clinical implications In MIS for renal tumors, OC was a rare event (1.9%), caused by various situations, leading to impaired perioperative outcomes. Emergency OC occurred once every 300 procedures. Increased BMI and cT stage were independent predictive factors of OC. Patient summary The incidence rate of open conversion (OC) in minimally invasive surgery for renal tumors is low. Only 20% of OC procedures occur in case of emergency, and others are caused by various situations. Increased body mass index and cT stage were independent predictive factors of OC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicolas Branger
- Department of Urology, Institut Paoli Calmettes, Marseille, France
| | | | | | - Pierre Bigot
- Department of Urology, CHU Angers, Angers, France
| | | | - Sophie Knipper
- Department of Urology, Institut Paoli Calmettes, Marseille, France
| | - Géraldine Pignot
- Department of Urology, Institut Paoli Calmettes, Marseille, France
| | - François Audenet
- Department of Urology, Hopital européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
| | | | | | | | - Cécile Champy
- Department of Urology, Hopital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
| | - Morgan Rouprêt
- GRC 5 Predictive Onco-Uro, AP-HP, Urology, Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | | | | | - Gaëlle Fiard
- Department of Urology, CHU Grenoble, Grenoble, France
| | | | | | | | | | - Fayek Taha
- Department of Urology, CHU Reims, Reims, France
| | - Richard Mallet
- Department of Urology, Polyclinique Francheville, Périgueux, France
| | | | - Laurent Guy
- Department of Urology, CHU Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Hayden DM, Korous KM, Brooks E, Tuuhetaufa F, King-Mullins EM, Martin AM, Grimes C, Rogers CR. Factors contributing to the utilization of robotic colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 2023; 37:3306-3320. [PMID: 36520224 PMCID: PMC10947550 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09793-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2022] [Accepted: 11/27/2022] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Some studies have suggested disparities in access to robotic colorectal surgery, however, it is unclear which factors are most meaningful in the determination of approach relative to laparoscopic or open surgery. This study aimed to identify the most influential factors contributing to robotic colorectal surgery utilization. METHODS We conducted a systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of published studies that compared the utilization of robotic colorectal surgery versus laparoscopic or open surgery. Eligible studies were identified through PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, PsycINFO, and ProQuest Dissertations in September 2021. RESULTS Twenty-nine studies were included in the analysis. Patients were less likely to undergo robotic versus laparoscopic surgery if they were female (OR = 0.91, 0.84-0.98), older (OR = 1.61, 1.38-1.88), had Medicare (OR = 0.84, 0.71-0.99), or had comorbidities (OR = 0.83, 0.77-0.91). Non-academic hospitals had lower odds of conducting robotic versus laparoscopic surgery (OR = 0.73, 0.62-0.86). Additional disparities were observed when comparing robotic with open surgery for patients who were Black (OR = 0.78, 0.71-0.86), had lower income (OR = 0.67, 0.62-0.74), had Medicaid (OR = 0.58, 0.43-0.80), or were uninsured (OR = 0.29, 0.21-0.39). CONCLUSION When determining who undergoes robotic surgery, consideration of factors such as age and comorbid conditions may be clinically justified, while other factors seem less justifiable. Black patients and the underinsured were less likely to undergo robotic surgery. This study identifies nonclinical disparities in access to robotics that should be addressed to provide more equitable access to innovations in colorectal surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dana M Hayden
- Department of Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Kevin M Korous
- Institute for Health and Equity, Medical College of Wisconsin, 1000 N. 92nd St, Milwaukee, WI, 53226, USA
| | - Ellen Brooks
- University of Utah School of Medicine, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, Salt Lake, UT, USA
| | - Fa Tuuhetaufa
- University of Utah School of Medicine, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, Salt Lake, UT, USA
| | | | - Abigail M Martin
- Department of Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Chassidy Grimes
- Department of Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Charles R Rogers
- Institute for Health and Equity, Medical College of Wisconsin, 1000 N. 92nd St, Milwaukee, WI, 53226, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Emile SH, Horesh N, Garoufalia Z, Gefen R, Zhou P, Strassman V, Wexner SD. Robotic and laparoscopic colectomy: propensity score-matched outcomes from a national cancer database. Br J Surg 2023; 110:717-726. [PMID: 37075480 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znad096] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/13/2023] [Revised: 03/16/2023] [Accepted: 03/21/2023] [Indexed: 04/21/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic and robotic approaches to colonic cancer surgery appear to provide similar outcomes. The present study aimed to compare short-term and survival outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic colectomy for colonic cancer. METHODS This retrospective review of patients with stage I-III colonic cancer who underwent laparoscopic or robotic colonic resection was undertaken using data from the National Cancer Database (2013-2019). Patients were matched using the propensity score matching method. The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival. Secondary outcomes included conversion to open surgery, duration of hospital stay, 30- and 90-day mortality, unplanned readmission, and positive resection margins. RESULTS The original cohort included 40 457 patients with stage I-III colonic adenocarcinoma, with a mean(s.d.) age of 67.4(12.9) years. Some 33 860 (83.7 per cent) and 6597 (17.3 per cent) patients underwent laparoscopic and robotic colectomy respectively. After matching, 6210 patients were included in each group. Robotic colectomy was associated with marginally longer overall survival for women, and patients with a Charlson score of 0, stage II-III disease or left-sided tumours. The robotic group had a significantly lower rate of conversion (6.6 versus 11 per cent; P < 0.001) and shorter hospital stay (median 3 versus 4 days) than the laparoscopic group. The two groups had similar rates of 30-day mortality (1.3 versus 1 per cent for laparoscopic and robotic procedures respectively), 90-day mortality (2.1 versus 1.8 per cent), 30-day unplanned readmission (3.7 versus 3.8 per cent), and positive resection margins (2.8 versus 2.5 per cent). CONCLUSION In this study population, robotic colectomy was associated with less conversion to open surgery and a shorter hospital stay compared with laparoscopic colectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sameh Hany Emile
- Ellen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA
- Colorectal Surgery Unit, General Surgery Department, Mansoura University Hospitals, Mansoura, Egypt
| | - Nir Horesh
- Ellen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA
- Department of Surgery and Transplantation, Sheba Medical Centre, Ramat Gan, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Zoe Garoufalia
- Ellen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA
| | - Rachel Gefen
- Ellen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA
- Department of General Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Hadassah Medical Organization, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Peige Zhou
- Ellen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA
| | - Victor Strassman
- Ellen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA
| | - Steven D Wexner
- Ellen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Harji D, Aldajani N, Cauvin T, Chauvet A, Denost Q. Parallel, component training in robotic total mesorectal excision. J Robot Surg 2022; 17:1049-1055. [PMID: 36515819 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-022-01496-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2022] [Accepted: 11/14/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
There has been widespread adoption of robotic total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer in recent years. There is now increasing interest in training robotic novice surgeons in robotic TME surgery using the principles of component-based learning. The aims of our study were to assess the feasibility of delivering a structured, parallel, component-based, training curriculum to surgical trainees and fellows. A prospective pilot study was undertaken between January 2021 and May 2021. A dedicated robotic training pathway was designed with two trainees trained in parallel per each robotic case based on prior experience, training grade and skill set. Component parts of each operation were allocated by the robotic trainer prior to the start of each case. Robotic proficiency was assessed using the Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS) and the EARCS Global Assessment Score (GAS). Three trainees participated in this pilot study, performing a combined number of 52 TME resections. Key components of all 52 TME operations were performed by the trainees. GEARS scores improved throughout the study, with a mean overall baseline score of 17.3 (95% CI 15.1-1.4) compared to an overall final assessment mean score of 23.8 (95% CI 21.6-25.9), p = 0.003. The GAS component improved incrementally for all trainees at each candidate assessment (p < 0.001). Employing a parallel, component-based approach to training in robotic TME surgery is safe and feasible and can be used to train multiple trainees of differing grades simultaneously, whilst maintaining high-quality clinical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deena Harji
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Colorectal Unit, Haut-Lévêque Hospital, Bordeaux University Hospital, Pessac, France
| | - Nour Aldajani
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Colorectal Unit, Haut-Lévêque Hospital, Bordeaux University Hospital, Pessac, France
| | - Thomas Cauvin
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Colorectal Unit, Haut-Lévêque Hospital, Bordeaux University Hospital, Pessac, France
| | - Alexander Chauvet
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Colorectal Unit, Haut-Lévêque Hospital, Bordeaux University Hospital, Pessac, France
| | - Quentin Denost
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Colorectal Unit, Haut-Lévêque Hospital, Bordeaux University Hospital, Pessac, France.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Mehta A, Cheng Ng J, Andrew Awuah W, Huang H, Kalmanovich J, Agrawal A, Abdul-Rahman T, Hasan MM, Sikora V, Isik A. Embracing robotic surgery in low- and middle-income countries: Potential benefits, challenges, and scope in the future. Ann Med Surg (Lond) 2022; 84:104803. [PMID: 36582867 PMCID: PMC9793116 DOI: 10.1016/j.amsu.2022.104803] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/27/2022] [Accepted: 10/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Robotic surgery has applications in many medical specialties, including urology, general surgery, and surgical oncology. In the context of a widespread resource and personnel shortage in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs), the use of robotics in surgery may help to reduce physician burnout, surgical site infections, and hospital stays. However, a lack of haptic feedback and potential socioeconomic factors such as high implementation costs and a lack of trained personnel may limit its accessibility and application. Specific improvements focused on improved financial and technical support to LMICs can help improve access and have the potential to transform the surgical experience for both surgeons and patients in LMICs. This review focuses on the evolution of robotic surgery, with an emphasis on challenges and recommendations to facilitate wider implementation and improved patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aashna Mehta
- University of Debrecen-Faculty of Medicine, Debrecen, 4032, Hungary
| | - Jyi Cheng Ng
- Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia
| | | | - Helen Huang
- Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, University of Medicine and Health Science, Dublin, Ireland
| | | | - Aniket Agrawal
- Department of Pediatric Surgery, Center for Children, Kokilaben Dhirubhai Ambani Hospital and Medical Research Institute, Mumbai, India
| | | | - Mohammad Mehedi Hasan
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Life Science, Mawlana Bhashani Science and Technology University, Tangail, Bangladesh,Corresponding author.
| | - Vladyslav Sikora
- Sumy State University and Toufik's World Medical Association, Sumy, Ukraine
| | - Arda Isik
- Istanbul Medeniyet University, Department of General Surgery, Istanbul, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic approach of Bai-Jiang-style vagus nerve-preserving splenectomy and azygoportal disconnection. Updates Surg 2022; 74:1773-1780. [PMID: 34994944 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-022-01236-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2021] [Accepted: 01/02/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Robotic surgery has been widely accepted in many kinds of surgical procedures. Little is known about clinical effects of robotic-assisted splenectomy and azygoportal disconnection (RSD) for gastroesophageal variceal bleeding and secondary hypersplenism owing to cirrhotic portal hypertension. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether RSD is feasible and safe for patients with cirrhotic portal hypertension and whether RSD is superior to laparoscopic splenectomy and azygoportal disconnection (LSD). We retrospectively investigated the clinical effects of 50 patients with cirrhosis who underwent vagus nerve-preserving RSD (n = 20) and LSD (n = 30) between September 2020 and October 2021. We compared patients' demographic, intraoperative, and perioperative variables. RSD and LSD were successful in all patients. Operative time did not differ significantly between the RSD group and LSD group (151.15 ± 21.78 min vs. 144.50 ± 24.30 min, P > 0.05), but intraoperative blood loss were significantly reduced in the RSD group (61.00 ± 34.93 mL vs. 105.00 ± 68.77 mL, P < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were found regarding intraoperative allogeneic transfusion rate, visual analog scale pain score on the postoperative first day, time to first oral intake, initial passage of flatus, initial off-bed activity, postoperative hospital stay, and overall perioperative complication rate (all P > 0.05). In conclusion, RSD is not only a technically feasible and safe procedure but it was associated with less blood loss than LSD for cirrhotic portal hypertension with gastroesophageal variceal bleeding and secondary hypersplenism. Registered at researchregistery.com: trial registration number is researchregistry7244, date of registration October 10, 2021, registered retrospectively.
Collapse
|
8
|
Kumar RA, Asanad K, Miranda G, Cai J, Djaladat H, Ghodoussipour S, Desai MM, Gill IS, Cacciamani GE. Population-Based Assessment of Determining Predictors for Discharge Disposition in Patients with Bladder Cancer Undergoing Radical Cystectomy. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:4613. [PMID: 36230536 PMCID: PMC9559503 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14194613] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/27/2022] [Revised: 09/20/2022] [Accepted: 09/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective: To assess predictors of discharge disposition—either home or to a CRF—after undergoing RC for bladder cancer in the United States. Methods: In this retrospective, cohort study, patients were divided into two cohorts: those discharged home and those discharged to CRF. We examined patient, surgical, and hospital characteristics. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to control for selected variables. All statistical tests were two-sided. Patients were derived from the Premier Healthcare Database. International classification of disease (ICD)-9 (<2014), ICD-10 (≥2015), and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes were used to identify patient diagnoses and encounters. The population consisted of 138,151 patients who underwent RC for bladder cancer between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2019. Results: Of 138,151 patients, 24,922 (18.0%) were admitted to CRFs. Multivariate analysis revealed that older age, single/widowed marital status, female gender, increased Charlson Comorbidity Index, Medicaid, and Medicare insurance are associated with CRF discharge. Rural hospital location, self-pay status, increased annual surgeon case, and robotic surgical approach are associated with home discharge. Conclusions: Several specific patient, surgical, and facility characteristics were identified that may significantly impact discharge disposition after RC for bladder cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Raj A. Kumar
- Catherine & Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| | - Kian Asanad
- Catherine & Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| | - Gus Miranda
- Catherine & Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| | - Jie Cai
- Catherine & Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| | - Hooman Djaladat
- Catherine & Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| | - Saum Ghodoussipour
- Bladder and Urothelial Cancer Program, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ 08903, USA
| | - Mihir M. Desai
- Catherine & Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| | - Inderbir S. Gill
- Catherine & Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| | - Giovanni E. Cacciamani
- Catherine & Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Herrera L, Escalon J, Johnston M, Sanchez A, Sanchez R, Mogollon I. Development of a robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) program. Lessons learned after 2500 cases. J Robot Surg 2022; 17:405-411. [PMID: 35732918 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-022-01430-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2022] [Accepted: 05/20/2022] [Indexed: 10/17/2022]
Abstract
Robotic surgery provides significant advantages in terms of an optimal three-dimensional and magnified view of the surgical field, superior maneuverability of surgical instruments, removal of surgeon's tremor and excellent ergonomics. Nonetheless, the adoption of this technology in thoracic surgery has been slower than in other specialties such as urology, gynecology or digestive surgery. In this article we describe our institution's experience in robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) in the span from 2012 to 2020. During this time the average annual growth of the program has been 55%. Among the most frequently procedures performed were lobectomies, wedge resection and segmentectomies. Surgical time and length of stay decreased as the number of procedures performed increased, relative to the learning curve. Additional important elements considered relevant to the success of the program are the resources available, leadership, motivation of the surgical team, adequate and stepwise training, as well as the collection of data for periodic analysis of results. All those initiatives have led to a relevant improvement of financial variables reflecting a cost reduction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luis Herrera
- Cardiothoracic Surgeon, Orlando Regional Medical Center (ORMC), Rod Taylor Thoracic Cancer Care Center, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL, USA
| | - Juan Escalon
- Cardiothoracic Surgeon, Orlando Regional Medical Center (ORMC), Rod Taylor Thoracic Cancer Care Center, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL, USA
| | - Matthew Johnston
- Cardiothoracic Surgeon, Orlando Regional Medical Center (ORMC), Rod Taylor Thoracic Cancer Care Center, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL, USA
| | - Alexis Sanchez
- Corporate Director Robotic Surgery Program, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL, USA
| | - Renata Sanchez
- Research Fellow, Robotic Surgery Program ORMC, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL, USA
| | - Ivan Mogollon
- Research Fellow, Robotic Surgery Program ORMC, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Ultrasound Image under Artificial Intelligence Algorithm to Evaluate the Intervention Effect of Accelerated Rehabilitation Surgery Nursing on Laparoscopic Hysterectomy. COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND NEUROSCIENCE 2022; 2022:9042954. [PMID: 35300399 PMCID: PMC8923757 DOI: 10.1155/2022/9042954] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2021] [Revised: 01/22/2022] [Accepted: 02/03/2022] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
To explore the application value of accelerated rehabilitation surgery (ERAS) nursing in laparoscopic total hysterectomy, 120 patients who underwent laparoscopic total hysterectomy for benign uterine diseases in the hospital were selected as the research object. According to different nursing schemes, they were divided into 60 cases in the experimental group (ERAS nursing program) and 60 cases in the control group (traditional perioperative nursing). All patients underwent postoperative ultrasonography, and the intraoperative and postoperative rehabilitation indexes of the two groups were analyzed. Moreover, an improved standard Capon beamforming (ISCB) algorithm is proposed, which is compared with SCB algorithm, sequential regression algorithm (SER), and recursive least square (RLS) algorithm. The results showed that the center average power and background average power (−46.92, −33.85) of the ISCB algorithm were significantly lower than those of SCB algorithm (−36.18, −23.64), SER algorithm (−39.02, −27.31), and RLS algorithm (−34.88, −24.66), while the contrast and resolution (19.11, 15.57) were significantly higher than those of SCB algorithm (12.74, 9.01), SER algorithm (13.86, 7.89), and RLS algorithm (13.26, 8.26)
. The anal exhaust time (11.84 ± 2.15 hours), analgesic effect score (3.37 ± 1.03 points), hospitalization days (3.72 ± 0.74 days), and hospitalization expenses (11859.03 ± 735.24 ¥) in the experimental group were significantly lower than those in the control group (20.95 ± 3.44 hours, 6.12 ± 1.46 points, 5.48 ± 0.91 days, 16135.22 ± 680.55 ¥)
. The score of NRS evaluation scale in the experimental group (2.28 ± 0.37) was significantly better than that in the control group (4.09 ± 0.65)
. The proportion of patients in the experimental group (very satisfied + satisfied + generally satisfied) (100%) was significantly better than that in the control group (71%), and the difference was statistically significant
. In the experimental group, there were 2 cases of postoperative fever, 1 case of nausea and vomiting, and 2 cases of lower extremity venous thrombosis. In the control group, there were 4 cases of postoperative fever, 4 cases of nausea and vomiting, and 2 cases of lower extremity venous thrombosis. In summary, ultrasound imaging based on the ISCB algorithm can display the pelvic floor structure of patients undergoing laparoscopic total hysterectomy with high quality and improve the diagnostic rate of doctors. ERAS nursing can accelerate patients’ postoperative rehabilitation, reduce postoperative pain, and improve patients’ satisfaction. It was worthy to be popularized and applied in the clinic.
Collapse
|
11
|
Pennington Z, Judy BF, Zakaria HM, Lakomkin N, Mikula AL, Elder BD, Theodore N. Learning curves in robot-assisted spine surgery: a systematic review and proposal of application to residency curricula. Neurosurg Focus 2022; 52:E3. [PMID: 34973673 DOI: 10.3171/2021.10.focus21496] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/21/2021] [Accepted: 10/22/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Spine robots have seen increased utilization over the past half decade with the introduction of multiple new systems. Market research expects this expansion to continue over the next half decade at an annual rate of 20%. However, because of the novelty of these devices, there is limited literature on their learning curves and how they should be integrated into residency curricula. With the present review, the authors aimed to address these two points. METHODS A systematic review of the published English-language literature on PubMed, Ovid, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted to identify studies describing the learning curve in spine robotics. Included articles described clinical results in patients using one of the following endpoints: operative time, screw placement time, fluoroscopy usage, and instrumentation accuracy. Systems examined included the Mazor series, the ExcelsiusGPS, and the TiRobot. Learning curves were reported in a qualitative synthesis, given as the mean improvement in the endpoint per case performed or screw placed where possible. All studies were level IV case series with a high risk of reporting bias. RESULTS Of 1579 unique articles, 97 underwent full-text review and 21 met the inclusion and exclusion criteria; 62 articles were excluded for not presenting primary data for one of the above-described endpoints. Of the 21 articles, 18 noted the presence of a learning curve in spine robots, which ranged from 3 to 30 cases or 15 to 62 screws. Only 12 articles performed regressions of one of the endpoints (most commonly operative time) as a function of screws placed or cases performed. Among these, increasing experience was associated with a 0.24- to 4.6-minute decrease in operative time per case performed. All but one series described the experience of attending surgeons, not residents. CONCLUSIONS Most studies of learning curves with spine robots have found them to be present, with the most common threshold being 20 to 30 cases performed. Unfortunately, all available evidence is level IV data, limited to case series. Given the ability of residency to allow trainees to safely perform these cases under the supervision of experienced senior surgeons, it is argued that a curriculum should be developed for senior-level residents specializing in spine comprising a minimum of 30 performed cases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zach Pennington
- 1Department of Neurosurgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Brendan F Judy
- 2Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; and
| | - Hesham M Zakaria
- 3Department of Neurosurgery, California Pacific Medical Center, Sutter Health, San Francisco, California
| | - Nikita Lakomkin
- 1Department of Neurosurgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | | | - Nicholas Theodore
- 2Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; and
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Sloan FA. Quality and Cost of Care by Hospital Teaching Status: What Are the Differences? Milbank Q 2021; 99:273-327. [PMID: 33751662 DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.12502] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Policy Points In two respects, quality of care tends to be higher at major teaching hospitals: process of care and long-term survival of cancer patients following initial diagnosis. There is also evidence that short-term (30-day) mortality is lower on average at such hospitals, although the quality of evidence is somewhat lower. Quality of care is mulitdimensional. Empirical evidence by teaching status on dimensions other than survival is mixed. Higher Medicare payments for care provided by major teaching hospitals are partially offset by lower payments to nonhospital providers. Nevertheless, the payment differences between major teaching and nonteaching hospitals for hospital stays, especially for complex cases, potentially increase prices other insurers pay for hospital care. CONTEXT The relative performance of teaching hospitals has been discussed for decades. For private and public insurers with provider networks, an issue is whether having a major teaching hospital in the network is a "must." For traditional fee-for-service Medicare, there is an issue of adequacy of payment of hospitals with various attributes, including graduate medical education (GME) provision. Much empirical evidence on relative quality and cost has been published. This paper aims to (1) evaluate empirical evidence on relative quality and cost of teaching hospitals and (2) assess what the findings indicate for public and private insurer policy. METHODS Complementary approaches were used to select studies for review. (1) Relevant studies highly cited in Web of Science were selected. (2) This search led to studies cited by these studies as well as studies that cited these studies. (3) Several literature reviews were helpful in locating pertinent studies. Some policy-oriented papers were found in Google under topics to which the policy applied. (4) Several papers were added based on suggestions of reviewers. FINDINGS Quality of care as measured in process of care studies and in longitudinal studies of long-term survival of cancer patients tends to be higher at major teaching hospitals. Evidence on survival at 30 days post admission for common conditions and procedures also tends to favor such hospitals. Findings on other dimensions of relative quality are mixed. Hospitals with a substantial commitment to graduate medical education, major teaching hospitals, are about 10% to 20% more costly than nonteaching hospitals. Private insurers pay a differential to major teaching hospitals at this range's lower end. Inclusive of subsidies, Medicare pays major teaching hospitals substantially more than 20% extra, especially for complex surgical procedures. CONCLUSIONS Based on the evidence on quality, there is reason for patients to be willing to pay more for inclusion of major teaching hospitals in private insurer networks at least for some services. Medicare payment for GME has long been a controversial policy issue. The actual indirect cost of GME is likely to be far less than the amount Medicare is currently paying hospitals.
Collapse
|
13
|
El-Hamamsy D, Geary RS, Gurol-Urganci I, van der Meulen J, Tincello D. Uptake and outcomes of robotic gynaecological surgery in England (2006-2018): an account of Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES). J Robot Surg 2021; 16:81-88. [PMID: 33590420 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-021-01197-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2020] [Accepted: 01/15/2021] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
This was a retrospective study to review the uptake and outcomes of robotic gynaecological surgery in England between 1st April 2006 and 31st March 2018, analysing Hospital Episode Statistics form National Health Service hospitals in England. Women aged 18 years and above who had elective gynaecological surgery were included and those who had undergone robotic gynaecology surgery were included. Robotic gynaecological procedures were defined as procedures that used a robotic minimal access approach for hysterectomy, adnexal surgery and urogynaecological surgery (sacrocolpopexy, sacrohysteropexy and colposuspension). Numbers of procedures were reviewed by year and mapped to the 44 NHS healthcare regions. Length of stay (nights in hospital), laparotomy (conversion during primary procedure or after return to theatre for management of complication), and 30-day emergency readmission rates were calculated by year and procedure type. Overall 527,217 elective gynaecological procedures were performed in the English NHS (1st April 2006 and 31st March 2018), of which 4384 (0.83%) were performed with robotic assistance (3864 (88%) hysterectomy, 706 (16%) adnexal surgery, 192 (4%) urogynaecological surgery). There was gradual rise in the uptake of robotic surgery but there was a marked geographical variation. Median (IQR) length of stay (LOS) was 1(1-2) night, laparotomy rate was 0.3% and 30-day emergency readmission rate was 4.7%. LOS was statistically, but not clinically, different across time. Other outcomes did not differ by year. Robotic gynaecological procedures are increasingly being used in the English NHS, predominantly for hysterectomy, although in small proportions (2.6% in the most recent study year). There was wide geographical variation in robotic uptake across England and overall, outcomes were comparable to those reported in other countries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D El-Hamamsy
- Women's and Children's CBU, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester General Hospital, Gwendolen Road, Leicester, LE5 4PW, UK
| | - R S Geary
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, Kings Cross, London, WC1H 9SH, UK
| | - I Gurol-Urganci
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, Kings Cross, London, WC1H 9SH, UK
| | - J van der Meulen
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, Kings Cross, London, WC1H 9SH, UK
| | - D Tincello
- Women's and Children's CBU, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester General Hospital, Gwendolen Road, Leicester, LE5 4PW, UK.
- Department of Health Sciences, College of Life Sciences, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Larach JT, Flynn J, Kong J, Waters PS, McCormick JJ, Murphy D, Stevenson A, Warrier SK, Heriot AG. Robotic colorectal surgery in Australia: evolution over a decade. ANZ J Surg 2021; 91:2330-2336. [PMID: 33438361 DOI: 10.1111/ans.16554] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2020] [Revised: 12/24/2020] [Accepted: 12/24/2020] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite reports of increasing adoption of robotics in colorectal surgery worldwide, data regarding its uptake in Australasia are lacking. This study examines the trends of robotic colorectal surgery in Australia during the last 10 years. METHODS Data from patients undergoing robotic colorectal surgery with the da Vinci robotic platform between 2010 and 2019 were obtained. Overall, numbers of specific colorectal procedures across Australia were obtained from the Medicare Benefit Schedule data over the same period. Pearson's correlation analysis was used to determine the statistical trends of overall and specific robotic colorectal procedures over time. RESULTS A total of 6110 robotic general surgery procedures were performed across Australia during the study period. Of these, 3522 (57.6%) were robotic colorectal procedures. An increasing trend of overall robotic colorectal procedures was seen over 10 years (Pearson's coefficient of 0.875; P = 0.001). While this applied to both the public and private sectors, 90.7% of the procedures were undertaken in the private sector. Restorative rectal resections, rectopexies, and right hemicolectomies accounted for 82.6% of the robotic colorectal procedures performed during this period with an increasing trend seen over time for each intervention. Moreover, a robotic approach was utilized in 12.5%, 41.0% and 9.0% of all restorative rectal resections, rectopexies and right hemicolectomies undertaken in Australia during 2019, respectively. CONCLUSION Robotic colorectal surgery has increased dramatically in Australia over the last 10 years, especially in the private sector. Penetration of robotic colorectal surgery in the public healthcare system will require focussed cost-benefit evaluations and governmental investment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- José Tomás Larach
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Division of Cancer Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Department of Digestive Surgery, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Julie Flynn
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Division of Cancer Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,General Surgery and Gastrointestinal Clinical Institute, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Joseph Kong
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Division of Cancer Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Peadar S Waters
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Division of Cancer Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Jacob J McCormick
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Division of Cancer Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,General Surgery and Gastrointestinal Clinical Institute, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Declan Murphy
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Division of Cancer Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,General Surgery and Gastrointestinal Clinical Institute, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Andrew Stevenson
- Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Satish K Warrier
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Division of Cancer Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,General Surgery and Gastrointestinal Clinical Institute, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Alexander G Heriot
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Division of Cancer Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,General Surgery and Gastrointestinal Clinical Institute, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|