Department of Neurological Surgery.
Center for Healthcare Value.
J Neurosurg. 2017 Nov;127(5):1089-1095. doi: 10.3171/2016.6.JNS16822. Epub 2017 Jan 20.
OBJECTIVE Concurrent surgeries, also known as "running two rooms" or simultaneous/overlapping operations, have recently come under intense scrutiny. The goal of this study was to evaluate the operative time and outcomes of concurrent versus nonconcurrent vascular neurosurgical procedures. METHODS The authors retrospectively reviewed 1219 procedures performed by 1 vascular neurosurgeon from 2012 to 2015 at the University of California, San Francisco. Data were collected on patient age, sex, severity of illness, risk of mortality, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status, procedure type, admission type, insurance, transfer source, procedure time, presence of resident or fellow in operating room (OR), number of co-surgeons, estimated blood loss (EBL), concurrent vs nonconcurrent case, severe sepsis, acute respiratory failure, postoperative stroke causing neurological deficit, unplanned return to OR, 30-day mortality, and 30-day unplanned readmission. For aneurysm clipping cases, data were also obtained on intraoperative aneurysm rupture and postoperative residual aneurysm. Chi-square and t-tests were performed to compare concurrent versus nonconcurrent cases, and then mixed-effects models were created to adjust for different procedure types, patient demographics, and clinical indicators between the 2 groups. RESULTS There was a significant difference in procedure type for concurrent (n = 828) versus nonconcurrent (n = 391) cases. Concurrent cases were more likely to be routine/elective admissions (53% vs 35%, p < 0.001) and physician referrals (59% vs 38%, p < 0.001). This difference in patient/case type was also reflected in the lower severity of illness, risk of death, and ASA class in the concurrent versus nonconcurrent cases (p < 0.01). Concurrent cases had significantly longer procedural times (243 vs 213 minutes) and more unplanned 30-day readmissions (5.7% vs 3.1%), but shorter mean length of hospital stay (11.2 vs 13.7 days), higher rates of discharge to home (66% vs 51%), lower 30-day mortality rates (3.1% vs 6.1%), lower rates of acute respiratory failure (4.3% vs 8.2%), and decreased 30-day unplanned returns to the OR (3.3% vs 6.9%; all p < 0.05). Rates of severe sepsis, postoperative stroke, intraoperative aneurysm rupture, and postoperative aneurysm residual were equivalent between the concurrent and nonconcurrent groups (all p values nonsignificant). Mixed-effects models showed that after controlling for procedure type, patient demographics, and clinical indicators, there was no significant difference in acute respiratory failure, severe sepsis, 30-day readmission, postoperative stroke, EBL, length of stay, discharge status, or intraoperative aneurysm rupture between concurrent and nonconcurrent cases. Unplanned return to the OR and 30-day mortality were significantly lower in concurrent cases (odds ratio 0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.31-0.98, p = 0.0431, and odds ratio 0.81, p < 0.001, respectively), but concurrent cases had significantly longer procedure durations (odds ratio 21.73; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Overall, there was a significant difference in the types of concurrent versus nonconcurrent cases, with more routine/elective cases for less sick patients scheduled in an overlapping fashion. After adjusting for patient demographics, procedure type, and clinical indicators, concurrent cases had longer procedure times, but equivalent patient outcomes, as compared with nonconcurrent vascular neurosurgical procedures.
同时手术,也称为“跑两房”或同时/重叠手术,最近受到了严格的审查。本研究的目的是评估同时手术与非同时手术的手术时间和结果。
作者回顾性分析了 2012 年至 2015 年期间,加利福尼亚大学旧金山分校的一位血管神经外科医生进行的 1219 例手术。收集的数据包括患者年龄、性别、疾病严重程度、死亡风险、美国麻醉师协会(ASA)状态、手术类型、入院类型、保险、转院来源、手术时间、手术室(OR)是否有住院医师或研究员、手术医生数量、估计失血量(EBL)、同时手术与非同时手术、严重脓毒症、急性呼吸衰竭、术后导致神经功能缺损的中风、非计划返回 OR、30 天死亡率和 30 天非计划再入院。对于动脉瘤夹闭病例,还记录了术中动脉瘤破裂和术后残留动脉瘤的情况。采用卡方检验和 t 检验比较同时手术与非同时手术病例,然后建立混合效应模型,以调整两组之间不同的手术类型、患者人口统计学和临床指标。
同时手术(n = 828)与非同时手术(n = 391)病例在手术类型上存在显著差异。同时手术更可能是常规/择期入院(53%比 35%,p < 0.001)和医生推荐(59%比 38%,p < 0.001)。同时手术组患者/病例类型的这种差异也反映在同时手术与非同时手术组患者的疾病严重程度、死亡风险和 ASA 分级较低(p < 0.01)。同时手术的手术时间明显更长(243 分钟比 213 分钟),30 天非计划再入院率更高(5.7%比 3.1%),但平均住院时间较短(11.2 天比 13.7 天),出院回家率较高(66%比 51%),30 天死亡率较低(3.1%比 6.1%),急性呼吸衰竭发生率较低(4.3%比 8.2%),30 天非计划返回 OR 率较低(3.3%比 6.9%;所有 p 值均<0.05)。同时手术组与非同时手术组严重脓毒症、术后中风、术中动脉瘤破裂和术后动脉瘤残留的发生率相当(所有 p 值均无显著性差异)。混合效应模型显示,在控制手术类型、患者人口统计学和临床指标后,同时手术与非同时手术病例的急性呼吸衰竭、严重脓毒症、30 天再入院、术后中风、EBL、住院时间、出院状态或术中动脉瘤破裂发生率无显著差异。同时手术的非计划返回 OR 和 30 天死亡率明显较低(优势比 0.55,95%置信区间 0.31-0.98,p = 0.0431,和优势比 0.81,p < 0.001),但同时手术的手术时间明显更长(优势比 21.73;p < 0.001)。
总体而言,同时手术与非同时手术病例存在显著差异,前者为病情较轻的患者安排重叠式常规/择期手术,后者为病情较重的患者安排非重叠式手术。在调整患者人口统计学、手术类型和临床指标后,同时手术的手术时间较长,但与非同时血管神经外科手术相比,患者结局相当。