首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the American College of Surgeons >The first national examination of outcomes and trends in robotic surgery in the United States
【24h】

The first national examination of outcomes and trends in robotic surgery in the United States

机译:美国首次对机器人手术的结果和趋势进行全国性检查

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: There are few population-based data describing outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery. We compared outcomes of robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open surgery in a nationally representative population database. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database from October 2008 to December 2009 was performed. We identified the most common robotic procedures by ICD-9 procedure codes and grouped them into categories by procedure type. Multivariate analyses examined mortality, length of stay (LOS), and total hospital charges, adjusting for age, race, sex, Charlson comorbidity index, and teaching hospital status. RESULTS: A total of 368,239 patients were identified. On adjusted analysis, compared with open, robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery was associated with decreased odds of mortality (odds ratio = 0.1; 95% CI, 0.0-0.2; p < 0.001), decreased mean LOS (-2.4 days; 95% CI, -2.5 to 2.3; p < 0.001), and increased mean total charges in all procedures (range $3,852 to $15,329) except coronary artery bypass grafting (-$17,318; 95% CI, -34,492 to -143; p = 0.048) and valvuloplasty (not statistically significant). Compared with laparoscopic, robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery was associated with decreased odds of mortality (odds ratio = 0.1; 95% CI, 0.0-0.6; p = 0.008), decreased LOS overall (-0.6 days; 95% CI, -0.7 to -0.5; p < 0.001), but increased LOS in prostatectomy and other kidney/bladder procedures (0.3 days; 95% CI, 0.1-0.4; p = 0.006; 0.8 days; 95% CI, 0.0-1.6; p = 0.049), and increased total charges ($1,309; 95% CI, 519-2,099; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Data suggest that, compared with open surgery, robotic-assisted surgery results in decreased LOS and diminished likelihood of death. However, these benefits are not as apparent when comparing robotic-assisted laparoscopic with nonrobotic laparoscopic procedures.
机译:背景:很少有基于人群的数据来描述机器人辅助手术的结果。我们在具有全国代表性的人口数据库中比较了机器人辅助,腹腔镜和开放手术的结果。研究设计:对2008年10月至2009年12月的全国住院患者样本数据库进行了回顾性分析。我们通过ICD-9程序代码识别了最常见的机器人程序,并按程序类型将它们分为几类。多变量分析检查了死亡率,住院时间(LOS)和总住院费用,并根据年龄,种族,性别,查尔森合并症指数以及医院状况进行了调整。结果:共鉴定出368,239名患者。经校正分析,与开放式机器人辅助腹腔镜手术相比,死亡率降低(几率= 0.1; 95%CI,0.0-0.2; p <0.001),平均LOS降低(-2.4天; 95%CI) ,-2.5至2.3; p <0.001),以及除冠状动脉搭桥术(-$ 17,318; 95%CI,-34,492至-143; p = 0.048)和瓣膜成形术外,所有程序的平均总费用均增加了(范围$ 3,852至$ 15,329) (无统计学意义)。与腹腔镜相比,机器人辅助腹腔镜手术的死亡率降低(赔率= 0.1; 95%CI,0.0-0.6; p = 0.008),整体LOS降低(-0.6天; 95%CI,-0.7至- -0.5; p <0.001),但在前列腺切除术和其他肾脏/膀胱手术中LOS增加(0.3天; 95%CI,0.1-0.4; p = 0.006; 0.8天; 95%CI,0.0-1.6; p = 0.049) ,并增加了总费用($ 1,309; 95%CI,519-2,099; p = 0.001)。结论:数据表明,与开放式手术相比,机器人辅助手术可降低LOS,降低死亡可能性。但是,将机器人辅助腹腔镜手术与非机器人腹腔镜手术进行比较时,这些好处并不明显。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号