Cargando…

Impact of type of minimally invasive approach on open conversions across ten common procedures in different specialties

BACKGROUND: Conversion rates during minimally invasive surgery are generally examined in the limited scope of a particular procedure. However, for a hospital or payor, the cumulative impact of conversions during commonly performed procedures could have a much larger negative effect than what is appr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shah, Paresh C., de Groot, Alexander, Cerfolio, Robert, Huang, William C., Huang, Kathy, Song, Chao, Li, Yanli, Kreaden, Usha, Oh, Daniel S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9283176/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35141775
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09073-5
_version_ 1784747277113360384
author Shah, Paresh C.
de Groot, Alexander
Cerfolio, Robert
Huang, William C.
Huang, Kathy
Song, Chao
Li, Yanli
Kreaden, Usha
Oh, Daniel S.
author_facet Shah, Paresh C.
de Groot, Alexander
Cerfolio, Robert
Huang, William C.
Huang, Kathy
Song, Chao
Li, Yanli
Kreaden, Usha
Oh, Daniel S.
author_sort Shah, Paresh C.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Conversion rates during minimally invasive surgery are generally examined in the limited scope of a particular procedure. However, for a hospital or payor, the cumulative impact of conversions during commonly performed procedures could have a much larger negative effect than what is appreciated by individual surgeons. The aim of this study is to assess open conversion rates during minimally invasive surgery (MIS) across common procedures using laparoscopic/thoracoscopic (LAP/VATS) and robotic-assisted (RAS) approaches. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using the Premier Database on patients who underwent common operations (hysterectomy, lobectomy, right colectomy, benign sigmoidectomy, low anterior resection, inguinal and ventral hernia repair, and partial nephrectomy) between January 2013 and September 2015. ICD-9 and CPT codes were used to define procedures, modality, and conversion. Propensity scores were calculated using patient, hospital, and surgeon characteristics. Propensity-score matched analysis was used to compare conversions between LAP/VATS and RAS for each procedure. RESULTS: A total of 278,520 patients had MIS approaches of the ten operations. Conversion occurred in 5% of patients and was associated with a 1.77 day incremental increase in length of stay and $3441 incremental increase in cost. RAS was associated with a 58.5% lower rate of conversion to open surgery compared to LAP/VATS. CONCLUSION: At a health system or payer level, conversion to open is detrimental not just for the patient and surgeon but also puts a significant strain on hospital resources. Use of RAS was associated with less than half of the conversion rate observed for LAP/VATS. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-022-09073-5.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9283176
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92831762022-07-16 Impact of type of minimally invasive approach on open conversions across ten common procedures in different specialties Shah, Paresh C. de Groot, Alexander Cerfolio, Robert Huang, William C. Huang, Kathy Song, Chao Li, Yanli Kreaden, Usha Oh, Daniel S. Surg Endosc Article BACKGROUND: Conversion rates during minimally invasive surgery are generally examined in the limited scope of a particular procedure. However, for a hospital or payor, the cumulative impact of conversions during commonly performed procedures could have a much larger negative effect than what is appreciated by individual surgeons. The aim of this study is to assess open conversion rates during minimally invasive surgery (MIS) across common procedures using laparoscopic/thoracoscopic (LAP/VATS) and robotic-assisted (RAS) approaches. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using the Premier Database on patients who underwent common operations (hysterectomy, lobectomy, right colectomy, benign sigmoidectomy, low anterior resection, inguinal and ventral hernia repair, and partial nephrectomy) between January 2013 and September 2015. ICD-9 and CPT codes were used to define procedures, modality, and conversion. Propensity scores were calculated using patient, hospital, and surgeon characteristics. Propensity-score matched analysis was used to compare conversions between LAP/VATS and RAS for each procedure. RESULTS: A total of 278,520 patients had MIS approaches of the ten operations. Conversion occurred in 5% of patients and was associated with a 1.77 day incremental increase in length of stay and $3441 incremental increase in cost. RAS was associated with a 58.5% lower rate of conversion to open surgery compared to LAP/VATS. CONCLUSION: At a health system or payer level, conversion to open is detrimental not just for the patient and surgeon but also puts a significant strain on hospital resources. Use of RAS was associated with less than half of the conversion rate observed for LAP/VATS. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-022-09073-5. Springer US 2022-02-09 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9283176/ /pubmed/35141775 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09073-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2022, corrected publication 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Shah, Paresh C.
de Groot, Alexander
Cerfolio, Robert
Huang, William C.
Huang, Kathy
Song, Chao
Li, Yanli
Kreaden, Usha
Oh, Daniel S.
Impact of type of minimally invasive approach on open conversions across ten common procedures in different specialties
title Impact of type of minimally invasive approach on open conversions across ten common procedures in different specialties
title_full Impact of type of minimally invasive approach on open conversions across ten common procedures in different specialties
title_fullStr Impact of type of minimally invasive approach on open conversions across ten common procedures in different specialties
title_full_unstemmed Impact of type of minimally invasive approach on open conversions across ten common procedures in different specialties
title_short Impact of type of minimally invasive approach on open conversions across ten common procedures in different specialties
title_sort impact of type of minimally invasive approach on open conversions across ten common procedures in different specialties
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9283176/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35141775
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09073-5
work_keys_str_mv AT shahpareshc impactoftypeofminimallyinvasiveapproachonopenconversionsacrosstencommonproceduresindifferentspecialties
AT degrootalexander impactoftypeofminimallyinvasiveapproachonopenconversionsacrosstencommonproceduresindifferentspecialties
AT cerfoliorobert impactoftypeofminimallyinvasiveapproachonopenconversionsacrosstencommonproceduresindifferentspecialties
AT huangwilliamc impactoftypeofminimallyinvasiveapproachonopenconversionsacrosstencommonproceduresindifferentspecialties
AT huangkathy impactoftypeofminimallyinvasiveapproachonopenconversionsacrosstencommonproceduresindifferentspecialties
AT songchao impactoftypeofminimallyinvasiveapproachonopenconversionsacrosstencommonproceduresindifferentspecialties
AT liyanli impactoftypeofminimallyinvasiveapproachonopenconversionsacrosstencommonproceduresindifferentspecialties
AT kreadenusha impactoftypeofminimallyinvasiveapproachonopenconversionsacrosstencommonproceduresindifferentspecialties
AT ohdaniels impactoftypeofminimallyinvasiveapproachonopenconversionsacrosstencommonproceduresindifferentspecialties