机器人辅助、腹腔镜和开腹根治性膀胱切除术的住院费用和手术效果比较:一项日本全国性研究。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Minato Yokoyama, Wei Chen, Yuma Waseda, Motohiro Fujiwara, Daisuke Kato, Takeshi Shirakawa, Yohei Shimizu, Tsunehiro Nenohi, Yuki Matsumoto, Taisuke Okumura, Masayasu Urushibara, Masumi Ai, Kiyohide Fushimi, Takashi Fukagai, Masatoshi Eto, Yasuhisa Fujii, Kazuhiro Ishizaka
{"title":"机器人辅助、腹腔镜和开腹根治性膀胱切除术的住院费用和手术效果比较:一项日本全国性研究。","authors":"Minato Yokoyama, Wei Chen, Yuma Waseda, Motohiro Fujiwara, Daisuke Kato, Takeshi Shirakawa, Yohei Shimizu, Tsunehiro Nenohi, Yuki Matsumoto, Taisuke Okumura, Masayasu Urushibara, Masumi Ai, Kiyohide Fushimi, Takashi Fukagai, Masatoshi Eto, Yasuhisa Fujii, Kazuhiro Ishizaka","doi":"10.1093/jjco/hyae039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate in-hospital fees and surgical outcomes of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC), laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) and open radical cystectomy (ORC) using a Japanese nationwide database.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All data were obtained from the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database between April 2020 and March 2022. Basic characteristics and perioperative indicators, including in-hospital fees, were compared among the RARC, LRC and ORC groups. Propensity score-matched comparisons were performed to assess the differences between RARC and ORC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the study period, 2931, 1311 and 2435 cases of RARC, LRC and ORC were identified, respectively. The RARC group had the lowest in-hospital fee (median: 2.38 million yen), the shortest hospital stay (26 days) and the lowest blood transfusion rate (29.5%), as well as the lowest complication rate (20.9%), despite having the longest anesthesia time (569 min) among the three groups (all P < 0.01). The outcomes of LRC were comparable with those of RARC, and the differences in these indicators between the RARC and ORC groups were greater than those between the RARC and LRC groups. In propensity score-matched comparisons between the RARC and ORC groups, the differences in the indicators remained significant (all P < 0.01), with an ~50 000 yen difference in in-hospital fees.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RARC and LRC were considered to be more cost-effective surgeries than ORC due to their superior surgical outcomes and comparable surgical fees in Japan. The widespread adoption of RARC and LRC is expected to bring economic benefits to Japanese society.</p>","PeriodicalId":14656,"journal":{"name":"Japanese journal of clinical oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparisons of in-hospital fee and surgical outcomes between robot-assisted, laparoscopic, and open radical cystectomy: a Japanese nationwide study.\",\"authors\":\"Minato Yokoyama, Wei Chen, Yuma Waseda, Motohiro Fujiwara, Daisuke Kato, Takeshi Shirakawa, Yohei Shimizu, Tsunehiro Nenohi, Yuki Matsumoto, Taisuke Okumura, Masayasu Urushibara, Masumi Ai, Kiyohide Fushimi, Takashi Fukagai, Masatoshi Eto, Yasuhisa Fujii, Kazuhiro Ishizaka\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jjco/hyae039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate in-hospital fees and surgical outcomes of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC), laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) and open radical cystectomy (ORC) using a Japanese nationwide database.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All data were obtained from the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database between April 2020 and March 2022. Basic characteristics and perioperative indicators, including in-hospital fees, were compared among the RARC, LRC and ORC groups. Propensity score-matched comparisons were performed to assess the differences between RARC and ORC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the study period, 2931, 1311 and 2435 cases of RARC, LRC and ORC were identified, respectively. The RARC group had the lowest in-hospital fee (median: 2.38 million yen), the shortest hospital stay (26 days) and the lowest blood transfusion rate (29.5%), as well as the lowest complication rate (20.9%), despite having the longest anesthesia time (569 min) among the three groups (all P < 0.01). The outcomes of LRC were comparable with those of RARC, and the differences in these indicators between the RARC and ORC groups were greater than those between the RARC and LRC groups. In propensity score-matched comparisons between the RARC and ORC groups, the differences in the indicators remained significant (all P < 0.01), with an ~50 000 yen difference in in-hospital fees.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RARC and LRC were considered to be more cost-effective surgeries than ORC due to their superior surgical outcomes and comparable surgical fees in Japan. The widespread adoption of RARC and LRC is expected to bring economic benefits to Japanese society.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14656,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Japanese journal of clinical oncology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Japanese journal of clinical oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jjco/hyae039\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Japanese journal of clinical oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jjco/hyae039","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的利用日本全国数据库评估机器人辅助根治性膀胱切除术(RARC)、腹腔镜根治性膀胱切除术(LRC)和开放式根治性膀胱切除术(ORC)的院内费用和手术效果:所有数据均来自2020年4月至2022年3月期间的诊断程序组合数据库。比较了 RARC 组、LRC 组和 ORC 组的基本特征和围手术期指标,包括院内费用。进行倾向得分匹配比较,以评估RARC和ORC之间的差异:研究期间,RARC、LRC 和 ORC 病例数分别为 2931、1311 和 2435 例。RARC 组的院内费用最低(中位数:238 万日元),住院时间最短(26 天),输血率最低(29.5%),并发症发生率最低(20.9%),尽管其麻醉时间(569 分钟)在三组中最长(均为 P 结论:RARC 和 LRC 被认为是手术过程中最有效的麻醉方法:在日本,RARC 和 LRC 因其出色的手术效果和可比的手术费用,被认为是比 ORC 更具成本效益的手术。预计 RARC 和 LRC 的广泛采用将为日本社会带来经济效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparisons of in-hospital fee and surgical outcomes between robot-assisted, laparoscopic, and open radical cystectomy: a Japanese nationwide study.

Objective: To evaluate in-hospital fees and surgical outcomes of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC), laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) and open radical cystectomy (ORC) using a Japanese nationwide database.

Methods: All data were obtained from the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database between April 2020 and March 2022. Basic characteristics and perioperative indicators, including in-hospital fees, were compared among the RARC, LRC and ORC groups. Propensity score-matched comparisons were performed to assess the differences between RARC and ORC.

Results: During the study period, 2931, 1311 and 2435 cases of RARC, LRC and ORC were identified, respectively. The RARC group had the lowest in-hospital fee (median: 2.38 million yen), the shortest hospital stay (26 days) and the lowest blood transfusion rate (29.5%), as well as the lowest complication rate (20.9%), despite having the longest anesthesia time (569 min) among the three groups (all P < 0.01). The outcomes of LRC were comparable with those of RARC, and the differences in these indicators between the RARC and ORC groups were greater than those between the RARC and LRC groups. In propensity score-matched comparisons between the RARC and ORC groups, the differences in the indicators remained significant (all P < 0.01), with an ~50 000 yen difference in in-hospital fees.

Conclusions: RARC and LRC were considered to be more cost-effective surgeries than ORC due to their superior surgical outcomes and comparable surgical fees in Japan. The widespread adoption of RARC and LRC is expected to bring economic benefits to Japanese society.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
177
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology is a multidisciplinary journal for clinical oncologists which strives to publish high quality manuscripts addressing medical oncology, clinical trials, radiology, surgery, basic research, and palliative care. The journal aims to contribute to the world"s scientific community with special attention to the area of clinical oncology and the Asian region. JJCO publishes various articles types including: ・Original Articles ・Case Reports ・Clinical Trial Notes ・Cancer Genetics Reports ・Epidemiology Notes ・Technical Notes ・Short Communications ・Letters to the Editors ・Solicited Reviews
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信