Comparison of In-Hospital Outcomes at Robot-Assisted Versus Open Partial Nephrectomy.

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Annals of Surgical Oncology Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-02 DOI:10.1245/s10434-025-17398-3
Francesco Di Bello, Natali Rodriguez Penaranda, Andrea Marmiroli, Mattia Longoni, Fabian Falkenbach, Quynh Chi Le, Zhe Tian, Jordan A Goyal, Claudia Collà Ruvolo, Gianluigi Califano, Massimiliano Creta, Fred Saad, Shahrokh F Shariat, Stefano Puliatti, Ottavio De Cobelli, Alberto Briganti, Markus Graefen, Felix H K Chun, Nicola Longo, Pierre I Karakiewicz
{"title":"Comparison of In-Hospital Outcomes at Robot-Assisted Versus Open Partial Nephrectomy.","authors":"Francesco Di Bello, Natali Rodriguez Penaranda, Andrea Marmiroli, Mattia Longoni, Fabian Falkenbach, Quynh Chi Le, Zhe Tian, Jordan A Goyal, Claudia Collà Ruvolo, Gianluigi Califano, Massimiliano Creta, Fred Saad, Shahrokh F Shariat, Stefano Puliatti, Ottavio De Cobelli, Alberto Briganti, Markus Graefen, Felix H K Chun, Nicola Longo, Pierre I Karakiewicz","doi":"10.1245/s10434-025-17398-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this work is to quantify the magnitude of improvement in in-hospital outcomes between historical and contemporary robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) versus historical and contemporary open PN (OPN).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Within the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2010-2019), we identified patients who underwent RPN and OPN. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Historical (2010-2014) versus contemporary (2015-2019) proportions were 39% (n = 5,897) versus 61% (n = 9168) for RPN and 59% (n = 7289) versus 41% (n = 5,120) for OPN. Relative to historical, contemporary RPN patients exhibited significantly better in-hospital outcomes in 6 of 12 categories that ranged from-76% for intraoperative complications to-24% for length of stay (LOS) ≥ 75th percentile. Relative to historical, contemporary OPN patients also exhibited significantly better in-hospital outcomes in 7 of 12 categories that ranged from-76% for intraoperative complications to-23% for LOS ≥ 75th percentile. When historical RPN was compared with historical OPN, RPN in-hospital outcomes were better in 10 of 12 comparisons that ranged from-75% for LOS ≥ 75th percentile to-28% for perioperative bleeding. Similarly, when contemporary RPN was compared with contemporary OPN, RPN outcomes were better in 8 of 12 comparisons that ranged from-75% for LOS ≥ 75th percentile to-27% for postoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The magnitude of improvement in in-hospital outcomes was more pronounced for contemporary versus historical OPN (seven improved categories) than for contemporary versus historical RPN (six improved categories). However, contemporary RPN outperformed contemporary OPN patients in eight in-hospital outcome categories.</p>","PeriodicalId":8229,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Surgical Oncology","volume":" ","pages":"6124-6132"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Surgical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-025-17398-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this work is to quantify the magnitude of improvement in in-hospital outcomes between historical and contemporary robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) versus historical and contemporary open PN (OPN).

Methods: Within the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2010-2019), we identified patients who underwent RPN and OPN. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit.

Results: Historical (2010-2014) versus contemporary (2015-2019) proportions were 39% (n = 5,897) versus 61% (n = 9168) for RPN and 59% (n = 7289) versus 41% (n = 5,120) for OPN. Relative to historical, contemporary RPN patients exhibited significantly better in-hospital outcomes in 6 of 12 categories that ranged from-76% for intraoperative complications to-24% for length of stay (LOS) ≥ 75th percentile. Relative to historical, contemporary OPN patients also exhibited significantly better in-hospital outcomes in 7 of 12 categories that ranged from-76% for intraoperative complications to-23% for LOS ≥ 75th percentile. When historical RPN was compared with historical OPN, RPN in-hospital outcomes were better in 10 of 12 comparisons that ranged from-75% for LOS ≥ 75th percentile to-28% for perioperative bleeding. Similarly, when contemporary RPN was compared with contemporary OPN, RPN outcomes were better in 8 of 12 comparisons that ranged from-75% for LOS ≥ 75th percentile to-27% for postoperative complications.

Conclusion: The magnitude of improvement in in-hospital outcomes was more pronounced for contemporary versus historical OPN (seven improved categories) than for contemporary versus historical RPN (six improved categories). However, contemporary RPN outperformed contemporary OPN patients in eight in-hospital outcome categories.

机器人辅助与开放式部分肾切除术的住院疗效比较。
目的:本研究的目的是量化历史和当代机器人辅助部分肾切除术(RPN)与历史和当代开放式肾切除术(OPN)在院内预后的改善程度。方法:在全国住院患者样本(2010-2019)中,我们确定了接受RPN和OPN的患者。多变量logistic回归模型拟合。结果:历史(2010-2014年)和当代(2015-2019年)RPN的比例分别为39% (n = 5,897)和61% (n = 9168), OPN为59% (n = 7289)和41% (n = 5,120)。与历史相比,当代RPN患者在12个类别中的6个类别中表现出明显更好的住院结果,从术中并发症的76%到住院时间(LOS)≥75个百分点的24%。与历史相比,当代OPN患者在12个类别中的7个类别中也表现出明显更好的院内结局,从术中并发症的76%到LOS≥75百分位的23%。当将历史RPN与历史OPN进行比较时,12个比较中有10个比较的院内RPN结果更好,范围从LOS≥75百分位的-75%到围手术期出血的28%。同样,当当代RPN与当代OPN进行比较时,12个比较中有8个的RPN结果更好,范围从LOS≥75百分位的75%到术后并发症的27%。结论:当代与历史OPN(7个改善类别)相比,当代与历史RPN(6个改善类别)在院内预后方面的改善幅度更为明显。然而,当代RPN在8个院内结果类别中优于当代OPN患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
10.80%
发文量
1698
审稿时长
2.8 months
期刊介绍: The Annals of Surgical Oncology is the official journal of The Society of Surgical Oncology and is published for the Society by Springer. The Annals publishes original and educational manuscripts about oncology for surgeons from all specialities in academic and community settings.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信