Division of Urology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Eur Urol. 2012 Jun;61(6):1239-44. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.03.032. Epub 2012 Mar 30.
Although robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy (RARC) was first reported in 2003 and has gained popularity, comparisons with open radical cystectomy (ORC) are limited to reports from high-volume referral centers.
To compare population-based perioperative outcomes and costs of ORC and RARC.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective observational cohort study using the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample to characterize 2009 RARC compared with ORC use and outcomes.
Propensity score methods were used to compare inpatient morbidity and mortality, lengths of stay, and costs.
We identified 1444 ORCs and 224 RARCs. Women were less likely to undergo RARC than ORC (9.8% compared with 15.5%, p = 0.048), and 95.7% of RARCs and 73.9% of ORCs were performed at teaching hospitals (p<0.001). In adjusted analyses, subjects undergoing RARC compared with ORC experienced fewer inpatient complications (49.1% and 63.8%, p = 0.035) and fewer deaths (0% and 2.5%, p<0.001). RARC compared with ORC was associated with lower parenteral nutrition use (6.4% and 13.3%, p = 0.046); however, there was no difference in length of stay. RARC compared with ORC was $3797 more costly (p = 0.023). Limitations include retrospective design, absence of tumor characteristics, and lack of outcomes beyond hospital discharge.
RARC is associated with lower parenteral nutrition use and fewer inpatient complications and deaths. However, lengths of stay are similar, and the robotic approach is significantly more costly.
虽然机器人辅助腹腔镜根治性膀胱切除术(RARC)于 2003 年首次报道,并已得到广泛应用,但与开放性根治性膀胱切除术(ORC)的比较仅限于来自高容量转诊中心的报告。
比较 ORC 和 RARC 的基于人群的围手术期结果和成本。
设计、设置和参与者:使用美国全国住院患者样本进行回顾性观察队列研究,以描述 2009 年 RARC 与 ORC 使用和结果的比较。
采用倾向评分法比较住院发病率和死亡率、住院时间和成本。
我们确定了 1444 例 ORC 和 224 例 RARC。女性接受 RARC 的可能性低于 ORC(9.8%比 15.5%,p=0.048),95.7%的 RARC 和 73.9%的 ORC 是在教学医院进行的(p<0.001)。在调整分析中,与 ORC 相比,接受 RARC 的患者住院并发症较少(49.1%和 63.8%,p=0.035),死亡率较低(0%和 2.5%,p<0.001)。与 ORC 相比,RARC 与较低的肠外营养使用相关(6.4%和 13.3%,p=0.046);然而,住院时间没有差异。与 ORC 相比,RARC 更昂贵 3797 美元(p=0.023)。局限性包括回顾性设计、缺乏肿瘤特征以及缺乏出院后结果。
RARC 与较低的肠外营养使用以及较少的住院并发症和死亡相关。然而,住院时间相似,机器人方法的成本明显更高。