Robotic-Assisted Versus Thoracoscopic Lobectomy Outcomes From High-Volume Thoracic Surgeons

Rishindra M. Reddy, Madhu Lalitha Gorrepati, Daniel S. Oh, Shilpa Mehendale, Michael F. Reed

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Reports of surgical outcomes comparing proficient surgeons who perform either robotic-assisted or video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy are lacking. We evaluate the comparative effectiveness of robotic-assisted and video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomies by surgeons who performed 20 or more annual surgical procedures in a national database. Methods: Patients 18 years or older, who underwent elective lobectomy by surgeons who performed 20 or more annual lobectomies by robotic-assisted or thoracoscopic approach from January 2011 through September 2015, were identified in the Premier Healthcare database with the use of codes from the ninth revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. Propensity-score matching based on patient and hospital characteristics and by year was performed 1:1 to identify comparable cohorts for analysis (n = 838 in each cohort). All tests were two-sided, with statistical significance set at p less than 0.05. Results: A total of 23,779 patients received an elective lobectomy during the study period: 9,360 were performed by video-assisted thoracoscopic approach and 2,994 were by robotic-assisted approach. Propensity-matched comparison of lobectomies performed by surgeons who performed 20 or more procedures annually (n = 838) showed that robotic-assisted procedures had a longer mean operative time by 25 minutes (mean 247.1 minutes vs 222.6 minutes, p < 0.0001) but had a lower conversion-to-open rate (4.8% vs 8.0%, p = 0.007) and a lower 30-day complication rate (33.4% vs 39.2%, p = 0.0128). Transfusion rates and 30-day mortality rates were similar between the two cohorts. Conclusions: When surgical outcomes are limited to surgeons who perform 20 or more annual procedures, the robotic-assisted approach is associated with a lower conversion-to-open rate and lower 30-day complication rate when than video-assisted thoracoscopic surgeons, with a mean operative time difference of 25 minutes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)902-908
Number of pages7
JournalAnnals of Thoracic Surgery
Volume106
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2018

Fingerprint

Robotics
Thorax
Operative Time
Databases
Propensity Score
International Classification of Diseases
Surgeons
Cohort Studies
Delivery of Health Care
Mortality

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Reddy, Rishindra M. ; Gorrepati, Madhu Lalitha ; Oh, Daniel S. ; Mehendale, Shilpa ; Reed, Michael F. / Robotic-Assisted Versus Thoracoscopic Lobectomy Outcomes From High-Volume Thoracic Surgeons. In: Annals of Thoracic Surgery. 2018 ; Vol. 106, No. 3. pp. 902-908.
@article{773805d5375641049e63b3a00ee6f45c,
title = "Robotic-Assisted Versus Thoracoscopic Lobectomy Outcomes From High-Volume Thoracic Surgeons",
abstract = "Background: Reports of surgical outcomes comparing proficient surgeons who perform either robotic-assisted or video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy are lacking. We evaluate the comparative effectiveness of robotic-assisted and video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomies by surgeons who performed 20 or more annual surgical procedures in a national database. Methods: Patients 18 years or older, who underwent elective lobectomy by surgeons who performed 20 or more annual lobectomies by robotic-assisted or thoracoscopic approach from January 2011 through September 2015, were identified in the Premier Healthcare database with the use of codes from the ninth revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. Propensity-score matching based on patient and hospital characteristics and by year was performed 1:1 to identify comparable cohorts for analysis (n = 838 in each cohort). All tests were two-sided, with statistical significance set at p less than 0.05. Results: A total of 23,779 patients received an elective lobectomy during the study period: 9,360 were performed by video-assisted thoracoscopic approach and 2,994 were by robotic-assisted approach. Propensity-matched comparison of lobectomies performed by surgeons who performed 20 or more procedures annually (n = 838) showed that robotic-assisted procedures had a longer mean operative time by 25 minutes (mean 247.1 minutes vs 222.6 minutes, p < 0.0001) but had a lower conversion-to-open rate (4.8{\%} vs 8.0{\%}, p = 0.007) and a lower 30-day complication rate (33.4{\%} vs 39.2{\%}, p = 0.0128). Transfusion rates and 30-day mortality rates were similar between the two cohorts. Conclusions: When surgical outcomes are limited to surgeons who perform 20 or more annual procedures, the robotic-assisted approach is associated with a lower conversion-to-open rate and lower 30-day complication rate when than video-assisted thoracoscopic surgeons, with a mean operative time difference of 25 minutes.",
author = "Reddy, {Rishindra M.} and Gorrepati, {Madhu Lalitha} and Oh, {Daniel S.} and Shilpa Mehendale and Reed, {Michael F.}",
year = "2018",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.03.048",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "106",
pages = "902--908",
journal = "Annals of Thoracic Surgery",
issn = "0003-4975",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "3",

}

Robotic-Assisted Versus Thoracoscopic Lobectomy Outcomes From High-Volume Thoracic Surgeons. / Reddy, Rishindra M.; Gorrepati, Madhu Lalitha; Oh, Daniel S.; Mehendale, Shilpa; Reed, Michael F.

In: Annals of Thoracic Surgery, Vol. 106, No. 3, 01.09.2018, p. 902-908.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Robotic-Assisted Versus Thoracoscopic Lobectomy Outcomes From High-Volume Thoracic Surgeons

AU - Reddy, Rishindra M.

AU - Gorrepati, Madhu Lalitha

AU - Oh, Daniel S.

AU - Mehendale, Shilpa

AU - Reed, Michael F.

PY - 2018/9/1

Y1 - 2018/9/1

N2 - Background: Reports of surgical outcomes comparing proficient surgeons who perform either robotic-assisted or video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy are lacking. We evaluate the comparative effectiveness of robotic-assisted and video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomies by surgeons who performed 20 or more annual surgical procedures in a national database. Methods: Patients 18 years or older, who underwent elective lobectomy by surgeons who performed 20 or more annual lobectomies by robotic-assisted or thoracoscopic approach from January 2011 through September 2015, were identified in the Premier Healthcare database with the use of codes from the ninth revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. Propensity-score matching based on patient and hospital characteristics and by year was performed 1:1 to identify comparable cohorts for analysis (n = 838 in each cohort). All tests were two-sided, with statistical significance set at p less than 0.05. Results: A total of 23,779 patients received an elective lobectomy during the study period: 9,360 were performed by video-assisted thoracoscopic approach and 2,994 were by robotic-assisted approach. Propensity-matched comparison of lobectomies performed by surgeons who performed 20 or more procedures annually (n = 838) showed that robotic-assisted procedures had a longer mean operative time by 25 minutes (mean 247.1 minutes vs 222.6 minutes, p < 0.0001) but had a lower conversion-to-open rate (4.8% vs 8.0%, p = 0.007) and a lower 30-day complication rate (33.4% vs 39.2%, p = 0.0128). Transfusion rates and 30-day mortality rates were similar between the two cohorts. Conclusions: When surgical outcomes are limited to surgeons who perform 20 or more annual procedures, the robotic-assisted approach is associated with a lower conversion-to-open rate and lower 30-day complication rate when than video-assisted thoracoscopic surgeons, with a mean operative time difference of 25 minutes.

AB - Background: Reports of surgical outcomes comparing proficient surgeons who perform either robotic-assisted or video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy are lacking. We evaluate the comparative effectiveness of robotic-assisted and video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomies by surgeons who performed 20 or more annual surgical procedures in a national database. Methods: Patients 18 years or older, who underwent elective lobectomy by surgeons who performed 20 or more annual lobectomies by robotic-assisted or thoracoscopic approach from January 2011 through September 2015, were identified in the Premier Healthcare database with the use of codes from the ninth revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. Propensity-score matching based on patient and hospital characteristics and by year was performed 1:1 to identify comparable cohorts for analysis (n = 838 in each cohort). All tests were two-sided, with statistical significance set at p less than 0.05. Results: A total of 23,779 patients received an elective lobectomy during the study period: 9,360 were performed by video-assisted thoracoscopic approach and 2,994 were by robotic-assisted approach. Propensity-matched comparison of lobectomies performed by surgeons who performed 20 or more procedures annually (n = 838) showed that robotic-assisted procedures had a longer mean operative time by 25 minutes (mean 247.1 minutes vs 222.6 minutes, p < 0.0001) but had a lower conversion-to-open rate (4.8% vs 8.0%, p = 0.007) and a lower 30-day complication rate (33.4% vs 39.2%, p = 0.0128). Transfusion rates and 30-day mortality rates were similar between the two cohorts. Conclusions: When surgical outcomes are limited to surgeons who perform 20 or more annual procedures, the robotic-assisted approach is associated with a lower conversion-to-open rate and lower 30-day complication rate when than video-assisted thoracoscopic surgeons, with a mean operative time difference of 25 minutes.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85050974505&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85050974505&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.03.048

DO - 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.03.048

M3 - Article

C2 - 29704479

AN - SCOPUS:85050974505

VL - 106

SP - 902

EP - 908

JO - Annals of Thoracic Surgery

JF - Annals of Thoracic Surgery

SN - 0003-4975

IS - 3

ER -