Suppr超能文献

在三级转诊中心,与微创食管切除术相比,机器人辅助的Ivor Lewis食管切除术安全且成本相当。

Robotic-Assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy Is Safe and Cost Equivalent Compared to Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy in a Tertiary Referral Center.

作者信息

Knitter Sebastian, Maurer Max M, Winter Axel, Dobrindt Eva M, Seika Philippa, Ritschl Paul V, Raakow Jonas, Pratschke Johann, Denecke Christian

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Campus Charité Mitte and Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany.

BIH Biomedical Innovation Academy, BIH Charité Clinician Scientist Program, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany.

出版信息

Cancers (Basel). 2023 Dec 25;16(1):112. doi: 10.3390/cancers16010112.

Abstract

In recent decades, robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has been increasingly adopted for patients with esophageal cancer (EC) or cancer of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). However, concerns regarding its costs compared to conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) have emerged. This study examined outcomes and costs of RAMIE versus total MIE in 128 patients who underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for EC/GEJ at our department between 2017 and 2021. Surgical costs were higher for RAMIE (EUR 12,370 vs. EUR 10,059, < 0.001). Yet, median daily (EUR 2023 vs. EUR 1818, = 0.246) and total costs (EUR 30,510 vs. EUR 29,180, = 0.460) were comparable. RAMIE showed a lower incidence of postoperative pneumonia (8% vs. 25%, = 0.029) and a trend towards shorter hospital stays (15 vs. 17 days, = 0.205), which may have equalized total costs. Factors independently associated with higher costs included readmission to the intensive care unit (hazard ratio [HR] = 7.0), length of stay (HR = 13.5), anastomotic leak (HR = 17.0), and postoperative pneumonia (HR = 5.4). In conclusion, RAMIE does not impose an additional financial burden. This suggests that RAMIE may be considered as a valid alternative approach for esophagectomy. Attention to typical cost factors can enhance postoperative care across surgical methods.

摘要

近几十年来,机器人辅助微创食管切除术(RAMIE)越来越多地应用于食管癌(EC)或胃食管交界癌(GEJ)患者。然而,与传统微创食管切除术(MIE)相比,其成本问题引发了关注。本研究调查了2017年至2021年间在我院接受Ivor Lewis食管切除术治疗EC/GEJ的128例患者中,RAMIE与全MIE的疗效和成本。RAMIE的手术成本更高(12370欧元对10059欧元,<0.001)。然而,每日中位数成本(2023欧元对1818欧元,=0.246)和总成本(30510欧元对29180欧元,=0.460)具有可比性。RAMIE术后肺炎的发生率较低(8%对25%,=0.029),且住院时间有缩短趋势(15天对17天,=0.205),这可能使总成本趋于平衡。与较高成本独立相关的因素包括入住重症监护病房(风险比[HR]=7.0)、住院时间(HR=13.5)、吻合口漏(HR=17.0)和术后肺炎(HR=5.4)。总之,RAMIE不会带来额外的经济负担。这表明RAMIE可被视为食管切除术的一种有效替代方法。关注典型的成本因素可改善所有手术方式的术后护理。

相似文献

3
Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: Postoperative Outcomes in a Nationwide Cohort.
J Surg Res. 2023 Mar;283:152-160. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2022.09.029. Epub 2022 Nov 18.
4
Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy - our first experience.
Rozhl Chir. 2023;102(11):422-429. doi: 10.33699/PIS.2023.102.11.422-429.
7
Robotic Versus Conventional Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Meta-analysis.
Ann Surg. 2023 Jul 1;278(1):39-50. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005782. Epub 2022 Dec 20.
9
Long-term survival outcomes associated with robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) for esophageal cancer.
Surg Endosc. 2023 May;37(5):4018-4027. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09588-x. Epub 2022 Sep 12.
10
Robot-assisted esophagogastric reconstruction in minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.
J Thorac Dis. 2019 May;11(5):1860-1866. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2019.05.29.

引用本文的文献

2
Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: Current Best Practice.
Dig Surg. 2025 Jun 5:1-9. doi: 10.1159/000546749.
3
Novel robot-assisted minimally invasive surgical technique for the treatment of esophageal cancer.
Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne. 2024 Nov 28;19(3):506-510. doi: 10.20452/wiitm.2024.17916. eCollection 2024 Dec 27.
4
Adoption of the Robotic Platform across Thoracic Surgeries.
J Clin Med. 2024 Sep 27;13(19):5764. doi: 10.3390/jcm13195764.

本文引用的文献

1
Robotic lung resection: a narrative review of the current role on primary lung cancer treatment.
J Thorac Dis. 2022 Dec;14(12):5039-5055. doi: 10.21037/jtd-22-635.
2
Robotic Versus Conventional Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Meta-analysis.
Ann Surg. 2023 Jul 1;278(1):39-50. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005782. Epub 2022 Dec 20.
3
Cost of postoperative complications after general surgery at a major Canadian academic centre.
Int J Qual Health Care. 2022 Oct 14;34(4). doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzac075.
4
Quality of Life after Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Dig Surg. 2022;39(4):153-161. doi: 10.1159/000526832. Epub 2022 Sep 1.
5
Why pay more for robot in esophageal cancer surgery?
Updates Surg. 2023 Feb;75(2):367-372. doi: 10.1007/s13304-022-01351-0. Epub 2022 Aug 11.
6
Long-term survival outcomes of esophageal cancer after minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.
World J Surg Oncol. 2022 Feb 25;20(1):50. doi: 10.1186/s12957-022-02518-0.
8
Evaluating the Cost for Robotic vs "Non-Robotic" Transhiatal Esophagectomy.
Am Surg. 2022 Mar;88(3):389-393. doi: 10.1177/00031348211046885. Epub 2021 Nov 18.
9
The Hidden Pandemic: the Cost of Postoperative Complications.
Curr Anesthesiol Rep. 2022;12(1):1-9. doi: 10.1007/s40140-021-00493-y. Epub 2021 Nov 1.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验