Comparative Effectiveness of Robotic-Assisted vs Thoracoscopic Lobectomy

Chest

Volumn 146, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 1505-1512

  Paul, Subroto ^a   Jalbert, Jessica ^a   Isaacs, Abby J ^a   Altorki, Nasser K ^a   Isom, O Wayne ^a   Sedrakyan, Art ^a  

^a NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BLEEDING; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; COMORBIDITY; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; ETHNICITY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH INSURANCE; HOSPITAL DISCHARGE; HOSPITAL MORTALITY; HUMAN; IATROGENIC BLEEDING COMPLICATION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LENGTH OF STAY; LUNG COMPLICATION; LUNG LOBECTOMY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; ROBOT ASSISTED SURGERY; ROBOTIC ASSISTED LOBECTOMY; THORACOSCOPIC LOBECTOMY; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; FOLLOW UP; LUNG RESECTION; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PROCEDURES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK; RISK ASSESSMENT; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURE; STATISTICAL MODEL; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TRENDS; UNITED STATES; VIDEO ASSISTED THORACOSCOPIC SURGERY;

ADULT; AGED; COHORT STUDIES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HOSPITAL MORTALITY; HUMANS; LENGTH OF STAY; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; ODDS RATIO; PNEUMONECTOMY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK ASSESSMENT; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; THORACIC SURGERY, VIDEO-ASSISTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84920260997     PISSN: 00123692     EISSN: 19313543     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1378/chest.13-3032     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. 1 Paul, S, McCulloch, P, Sedrakyan, A, Robotic surgery: revisiting “no innovation without evaluation.”. BMJ, 346, 2013, f1573.
2. 2 Intuitive Surgical, Inc website. http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=122359&p=irol-IRHome Accessed September 2013.
3. 3 Cerfolio, RJ, Bryant, AS, Minnich, DJ, Starting a robotic program in general thoracic surgery: why, how, and lessons learned. Ann Thorac Surg 91:6 (2011), 1729–1736.
4. 4 Park, BJ, Flores, RM, Cost comparison of robotic, video-assisted thoracic surgery and thoracotomy approaches to pulmonary lobectomy. Thorac Surg Clin 18:3 (2008), 297–300.
5. 5 Wright, JD, Ananth, CV, Lewin, SN, et al. Robotically assisted vs laparoscopic hysterectomy among women with benign gynecologic disease. JAMA 309:7 (2013), 689–698.
6. 6 Wright, JD, Burke, WM, Wilde, ET, et al. Comparative effectiveness of robotic versus laparoscopic hysterectomy for endometrial cancer. J Clin Oncol 30:8 (2012), 783–791.
7. 7 Chitwood, WR Jr, Rodriguez, E, Chu, MW, et al. Robotic mitral valve repairs in 300 patients: a single-center experience. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 136:2 (2008), 436–441.
8. 8 Nifong, LW, Chitwood, WR, Pappas, PS, et al. Robotic mitral valve surgery: a United States multicenter trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 129:6 (2005), 1395–1404.
9. 9 Nifong, LW, Rodriguez, E, Chitwood, WR Jr, 540 consecutive robotic mitral valve repairs including concomitant atrial fibrillation cryoablation. Ann Thorac Surg 94:1 (2012), 38–42.
10. 10 Park, BJ, Melfi, F, Mussi, A, et al. Robotic lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): long-term oncologic results. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 143:2 (2012), 383–389.
11. 11 Woo, YJ, Nacke, EA, Robotic minimally invasive mitral valve reconstruction yields less blood product transfusion and shorter length of stay. Surgery 140:2 (2006), 263–267.
12. 12 Folliguet, T, Vanhuyse, F, Constantino, X, Realli, M, Laborde, F, Mitral valve repair robotic versus sternotomy. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 29:3 (2006), 362–366.
13. 13 Paul, S, Nasar, A, Port, JL, et al. Comparative analysis of diaphragmatic hernia repair outcomes using the nationwide inpatient sample database. Arch Surg 147:7 (2012), 607–612.
14. 14 Paul, S, Sedrakyan, A, Chiu, YL, et al. Outcomes after lobectomy using thoracoscopy vs thoracotomy: a comparative effectiveness analysis utilizing the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 43:4 (2013), 813–817.
15. 15 Paul, S, Altorki, NK, Sheng, S, et al. Thoracoscopic lobectomy is associated with lower morbidity than open lobectomy: a propensity-matched analysis from the STS database. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 139:2 (2010), 366–378.
16. 16 Elixhauser, A, Steiner, C, Harris, DR, Coffey, RM, Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care 36:1 (1998), 8–27.
17. 17 van Walraven, C, Austin, PC, Jennings, A, Quan, H, Forster, AJ, A modification of the Elixhauser comorbidity measures into a point system for hospital death using administrative data. Med Care 47:6 (2009), 626–633.
18. 18 Gadzinski, AJ, Dimick, JB, Ye, Z, Miller, DC, Utilization and outcomes of inpatient surgical care at critical access hospitals in the United States. JAMA Surg 148:7 (2013), 589–596.
19. 19 Cost-to-charge ratio files: nationwide inpatient sample (NIS)user guide. Agency for HealthcareResearch and Quality website. http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/db/state/CCR2011NISUserGuide.pdf, 2011 Accessed September 2013.
20. 20 Sun, Y, Friedman, B, Tools for more accurate inpatient cost estimates with HCUP databases, [errata added October 25, 2012]. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality website. http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/methods/2011_04.pdf, 2009 Accessed September 2013.
21. 21 Hu, JC, Why I perform robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, despite more incontinence and erectile dysfunction diagnoses compared to open surgery: it's not about the robot. Eur Urol 57:3 (2010), 544–545.
22. 22 Hu, JC, Gu, X, Lipsitz, SR, et al. Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy. JAMA 302:14 (2009), 1557–1564.
23. 23 Hyams, E, Pierorazio, P, Mullins, JK, et al. A comparative cost analysis of robot-assisted versus traditional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. J Endourol 26:7 (2012), 843–847.
24. 24 Trinh, QD, Sammon, J, Sun, M, et al. Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open radical prostatectomy: results from the nationwide inpatient sample. Eur Urol 61:4 (2012), 679–685.
25. 25 Rabin, RC, New concerns on robotic surgeries. The New York Times, 2013 September 9.
26. 26 Cooper, MA, Ibrahim, A, Lyu, H, Makary, MA, Underreporting of robotic surgery complications [published online ahead of print August 27. J Healthc Qual, 2013.
27. 27 Augustin, F, Bodner, J, Maier, H, et al. Robotic-assisted minimally invasive vs. thoracoscopic lung lobectomy: comparison of perioperative results in a learning curve setting. Langenbecks Arch Surg 398:6 (2013), 895–901.
28. 28 Jin, LX, Ibrahim, AM, Newman, NA, Makarov, DV, Pronovost, PJ, Makary, MA, Robotic surgery claims on United States hospital websites. J Healthc Qual 33:6 (2011), 48–52.
29. 29 Ahmed, K, Ibrahim, A, Wang, TT, et al. Assessing the cost effectiveness of robotics in urological surgery - a systematic review. BJU Int 110:10 (2012), 1544–1556.