Dataset Information

[Robotic surgery versus conventional open chest surgery for heart tumor: a propensity score matching analysis].

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To compare conventional open chest surgery and robotic surgery for their efficacy, short?term outcomes and patient selection in the treatment of heart tumors. Method The clinical data were collected from 225 patients (a total of 228 operations) who underwent cardiac neoplasm resection in our hospital between January, 1993 and April, 2016. A propensity score matching (PSM) was established according to the vital baseline data of the patients receiving conventional open chest surgery (n=125) and robotic surgery (n=60) after screening. The patients were matched for propensity into 60 pairs, and the efficacy, short?term outcomes and patient selection were compared between the two groups. RESULTS:Before PSM, the patients in conventional surgery group had significantly greater tumor size (P<0.001) and a higher proportion of patients with New York Heart Association functional class III and IV (P<0.001). The patients' baseline data were nearly balanced (P=0.982) between the two groups after matching. No significant differences were found between the two groups in cardiopulmonary bypass time (P=0.256), crossclamp time (P=0.862), in?hospital mortality (P=1.000), arrhythmia (P=1.000), delayed mechanical ventilation (>24 h; P=0.209), thoracic complications (P=0.611) or systemic embolism (P=1.000). The survival rates were 100% in both groups in the 6?month follow?up after the operation, and no significant difference was found between the two groups in the incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events within 6 months (P=0.438). CONCLUSION:Robotic heart tumor resection has a favorable efficacy with a good short?term prognosis, and can serve as an alternative for treatment of solitary lesions in low?risk patients receiving operations for the first time.

SUBMITTER: Li SL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6743956 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

[Robotic surgery versus conventional open chest surgery for heart tumor: a propensity score matching analysis].

Li Shuang-Lei SL Gao Chang-Qing CQ

Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University 20171001 10

<h4>Objective</h4>To compare conventional open chest surgery and robotic surgery for their efficacy, short?term outcomes and patient selection in the treatment of heart tumors. Method The clinical data were collected from 225 patients (a total of 228 operations) who underwent cardiac neoplasm resection in our hospital between January, 1993 and April, 2016. A propensity score matching (PSM) was established according to the vital baseline data of the patients receiving conventional open chest surg ...[more]

PMID: 29070457

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Minimally invasive surgery in obese patients is still challenging, so exploring one more item in this research field ranks among the main goals of this research. We aimed to compare short-term postoperative outcomes of open and video-laparoscopic (VL) approaches in CRC obese patients undergoing colorectal resection. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of a surgical database including 138 patients diagnosed with CRC, undergoing VL (n = 87, 63%) and open (n = 51, 37%) colorectal surgery. As a first step, propensity score matching was performed to balance the comparison between the two intervention groups (VL and open) in order to avoid selection bias. The matched sample (N = 98) was used to run further regression models in order to analyze the observed VL surgery advantages in terms of postoperative outcome, focusing on hospitalization and severity of postoperative complications, according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Results: The study sample was predominantly male (N = 86, 62.3%), and VL was more frequent than open surgery (63% versus 37%). The two subgroup results obtained before and after the propensity score matching showed comparable findings for age, gender, BMI, and tumor staging. The specimen length and postoperative time before discharge were longer in open surgery (OS) patients; the number of harvested lymph nodes was higher than in VL patients as well (p < 0.01). Linear regression models applied separately on the outcomes of interest showed that VL-treated patients had a shorter hospital stay by almost two days and about one point less Clavien-Dindo severity than OS patients on average, given the same exposure to confounding variables. Tumor staging was not found to have a significant role in influencing the short-term outcomes investigated. Conclusion: Comparing open and VL surgery, improved postoperative outcomes were observed for VL surgery in obese patients after surgical resection for CRC. Both postoperative recovery time and Clavien-Dindo severity were better with VL surgery.

Project description:BackgroundThe objective of this study was to compare the results of laparoscopic hepatectomy with those of open hepatectomy for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CCLM) using a propensity score matching (PSM) in two university hospital settings.MethodsA patient in the laparoscopic approach (LA) surgery group was randomly matched with another patient in the open approach (OA) group using a 1:1 allocated ratio with the nearest estimated propensity score. No patients of the LA group were excluded for the matching. Matching criteria included age, gender, body mass index (BMI), American society anesthesiologists score, potential co-morbidities, hepatopathies, synchronous or metachronous lesions, size and number of CCLM, preoperative chemotherapy, minor or major liver resections. Intraoperative, postoperative data, and survival were compared in both groups.ResultsFrom January 2012 to January 2015, a total of 242 hepatectomies were consecutively performed, of which 119 for CCLM, namely 101 in the OA group (84.9%) and 18 in the LA group (15.1%). The conversion rate was 5.6% (n=1). The mortality rate was 1% in the OA group and 0% in the LA group. Prior to PSM, there was a statistically significant difference favorable to the LA group regarding operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay and the rate of medical complications. After PSM, there was no difference regarding operative time or length of hospital stay. However, there was a trend towards less blood loss (P=0.066) and fewer medical complications (44.4% vs.16.7%, P=0.07). The R0 resection rate was 94.4% (n=17) in the two groups. In addition, there was no difference regarding overall survival (P=0.358) and recurrence-free survival [HR =0.99 (0.1-12.7); P=0.99].ConclusionsLaparoscopic liver resections for CCLM seem to yield short- and long-term results, which are similar to open hepatectomies, and could well be considered an alternative to open surgery and become the gold standard in carefully selected patients.

Project description:Background:Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is associated with improved postoperative outcomes compared to open surgery; however, economic studies have yielded contradictory results. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and economic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for patients with rectal cancer. Methods:Propensity score matching analysis was performed in a retrospective cohort of patients who underwent elective low anterior resection for rectal cancer treatment by laparoscopic and open surgery in a single Brazilian cancer center. Matched covariates included age, gender, body mass index, pTNM stage, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, type of anesthesia, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and index surgery. The clinical and economic outcomes were evaluated. The follow-up period was within 30 days of the index procedure. The clinical outcomes were reoperation, postoperative complications, operative time, length of stay in the intensive care unit, and postoperative hospital stay. For economic outcomes, a cost analysis was used to compare the costs. Results:Initially, 220 patients were evaluated. After propensity score matching, 100 patients were included in the analysis (50 patients in the open surgery group and 50 patients in the laparoscopic surgery group). There were no differences in patients' baseline characteristics. Operative time was longer for laparoscopic surgery (247 minutes vs 285 minutes, P=0.006). There were no significant differences in other clinical outcomes. The hospital costs were similar between the two groups (Brazilian reais 21,233.15 vs Brazilian reais 21,529.28, P=0.115), although the intraoperative costs were higher for laparoscopic surgery, mainly owing to the surgical devices and the theater-related costs. The postoperative costs were lower for laparoscopic surgery, owing to lower intensive care unit, ward, and reoperation costs. Conclusion:Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is not costlier than open surgery from the health care provider's perspective, since the intraoperative costs were offset by lower postoperative costs. Open surgery tends to have a longer length of stay.

Dataset Information

[Robotic surgery versus conventional open chest surgery for heart tumor: a propensity score matching analysis].

Publications

[Robotic surgery versus conventional open chest surgery for heart tumor: a propensity score matching analysis].

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets