Transoral Robotic Surgery: A Population-Level Analysis.

OBJECTIVE

(1) To determine baseline demographic, geographic, clinical, and pathologic characteristics of patients who had transoral robotic surgery (TORS) for oropharyngeal cancer. (2) To analyze margin status and unplanned readmission after TORS versus nonrobotic surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective database review.

SETTING

National Cancer Database (2010-2011).

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Searching the National Cancer Database for adults with oropharyngeal cancer, we identified 877 patients who had TORS and 4269 patients who had nonrobotic surgery. Outcomes of interest included likelihood of adjuvant therapy, margin status, and unplanned readmission. Statistical analysis included chi-square, t tests, and multivariate regression.

RESULTS

From 2010 to 2011, there was a 67% increase in the use of TORS for oropharyngeal cancer. Compared with patients who had nonrobotic surgery, TORS patients were more likely to be at academic centers (80.8% vs 49.1%, P < .001), to have private insurance (62.2% vs 57.4%, P < .001), and to have human papilloma virus (HPV)-positive tumors (48.3% vs 27.1%, P < .001). TORS (odds ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39-0.63) and HPV positivity (odds ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.53-0.99) were independently associated with decreased likelihood of adjuvant chemoradiation versus radiation therapy. TORS patients were less likely to have positive margins than were patients who had nonrobotic surgery (20.2% vs 31.0%, P < .001). High-volume TORS centers had lower rates of positive margins (15.8% vs 26.1%, P < .001) and unplanned readmissions (3.1% vs 6.1%, P < .03) than did low-volume centers.

CONCLUSIONS

TORS is being rapidly adopted by academic and community cancer centers. TORS is associated with a lower rate of positive margins than nonrobotic surgery, and high-volume centers have the lowest rates of positive margins and unplanned readmissions.