Differences in short-term outcomes between open versus robot-assisted radical cystectomy in frail malnourished patients.
Aged
Cystectomy
/ adverse effects
Databases, Factual
Failure to Rescue, Health Care
/ statistics & numerical data
Female
Frailty
/ complications
Hospital Charges
/ statistics & numerical data
Hospital Mortality
Humans
Length of Stay
/ statistics & numerical data
Male
Malnutrition
/ complications
Middle Aged
Postoperative Complications
/ etiology
Robotic Surgical Procedures
/ adverse effects
Urinary Bladder Neoplasms
/ complications
Complications
Frailty
Length of stay
Open radical cystectomy
Robot-assisted radical cystectomy
Journal
European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology
ISSN: 1532-2157
Titre abrégé: Eur J Surg Oncol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8504356
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2020
07 2020
Historique:
received:
17
10
2019
revised:
24
02
2020
accepted:
12
03
2020
pubmed:
30
3
2020
medline:
30
12
2020
entrez:
30
3
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We tested whether frail patients may benefit from robot-assisted (RARC) relative to open radical cystectomy (ORC). Frail patients treated with RC were identified within the National Inpatient Sample database (2008-2015). The effect of RARC vs. ORC was tested in five separate multivariable models predicting: complications, failure to rescue (FTR), in-hospital mortality, length of stay (LOS) and total hospital charges (THCs). As internal validity measure, analyses were repeated among non-frail patients. All models were weighted and adjusted for clustering, as well as all available patient and hospital characteristics. Of 11,578 RC patients, 3477 (30.0%) were frail. RARC was performed in 488 (14.0%) frail patients and 1386 (17.1%) non-frail patients. Among frail, RARC was only independently associated with shorter LOS (median 8 vs. 9 days, relative ratio [RR] 0.79, p < 0.001). Conversely, among non-frail, RARC was independently associated with lower complications (57.3 vs. 59.1%, odds ratio [OR] 0.82, p = 0.004) and shorter LOS (median 6 vs. 7 days, RR 0.88, p < 0.001), but also predicted higher THCs (+2850.3 US dollars, p = 0.001). In frail patients, the use of RARC did not result in better short-term outcomes except for one-day advantage in LOS. Conversely, in non-frail patients, the use of RARC resulted in lower complication rates and shorter LOS at the cost of higher THCs. In consequence, the benefit of RARC appears relatively marginal in frail patients and our data do not suggest a clear and clinically-meaningful benefit of RARC over ORC in frail radical cystectomy population.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32220544
pii: S0748-7983(20)30351-6
doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2020.03.204
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1347-1352Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of competing interest None.