Dataset Information

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Primary Resection for Retroperitoneal Soft Tissue Sarcoma: A Propensity-Matched Study From the National Cancer Database.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Although well described for gastrointestinal and pelvic cancers, use of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for the management of retroperitoneal soft tissue sarcoma (RPS) remains unknown. The current study aimed to describe patterns of MIS use and assess the association between MIS and clinical outcomes among patients undergoing surgery for RPS.

Methods

Patients undergoing a primary resection for RPS between 2010 and 2014 were identified using the National Cancer Database. Multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the association between use of MIS and clinical outcomes. Sensitivity analysis was performed using propensity score-matching (PSM).

Results

This study identified 3844 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Of these patients, 89.3% (n = 3432) underwent an open surgery, whereas 10.7% (n = 412) underwent MIS. The patients undergoing MIS were more likely to present with smaller tumors (open vs MIS: median tumor size, 17 cm; interquartile range [IQR, 9.8-26.0] vs 10.5 cm [IQR, 6.5-18.0]) and to undergo surgery at community hospitals (26.8% vs 36.1%; both P < 0.001). Although MIS was associated with a shorter hospital length of stay [LOS] (median LOS, 6 days [IQR, 5-9 days] vs 4 days [IQR, 2-7]; P < 0.001), postoperative mortality and overall survival were comparable between the two treatment groups (all P > 0.05). These findings were confirmed using PSM.

Conclusions

MIS was associated with a shorter LOS, however, postoperative mortality and overall survival were comparable by operative approach. Future research is required to evaluate the use of MIS for the management of RPS. Policies are required to ensure that patients receive care in accordance with best practices and recommended guidelines.

SUBMITTER: Gani F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8383095 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOpioid dependence is a public health crisis and surgery is a risk factor for long-term opioid use. Though minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is associated with less perioperative pain, demonstrating an association with less long-term opioid use would be another reason to justify adoption of minimally invasive techniques. We compared the rates for long-term opioid prescriptions among patients in a large national database who underwent minimally invasive and open colectomy.MethodsUsing the MarketScan Database, we retrospectively analyzed patients undergoing colon resection for benign and malignant diseases between 2013 and 2017. Among opioid-naïve patients who had ≥ 1 opioid prescriptions filled perioperatively (30 days before surgery to 14 days after discharge), propensity score matching was applied for group comparisons [open (OS) versus MIS, and laparoscopic (LS) versus robotic-assisted surgery (RS)]. The primary outcome was long-term opioid use defined as the proportion of patients with ≥ 1 long-term opioid prescriptions filled 90-180 days after discharge. Risks factors for long-term opioid use were assessed using logistic regression.ResultsAmong the 5413 matched pairs in the MIS versus OS cohorts, MIS significantly reduced long-term opioid use of 'any opioids' (13.3% vs. 20.9%), schedule II/III opioids (11.7% vs. 19.2%), and high-dose opioids (4.3% vs. 7.7%; all p < 0.001). Among the 1195 matched pairs in the RS versus LS cohorts, RS was associated with less high-dose opioids (2.1% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.015) 90-180 days after discharge. Other risk factors for long-term opioid use included younger age, benign indications, tobacco use, mental health conditions, and > 6 Charlson comorbidities.ConclusionMinimally invasive colectomy is associated with a significant reduction in long-term opioid use when compared to OS. Robotic-assisted colectomy was associated with less high-dose opioids compared to LS. Increasing adoption of minimally invasive surgery for colectomy and including RS, where appropriate, may decrease long-term opioid use.

Project description:BackgroundSelected studies have reported improved outcomes in laparoscopic compared with open distal pancreatic resection. Concerns regarding failure to achieve proper oncological resection and compromised long-term outcomes remain. This study investigated whether postoperative outcomes and long-term survival after laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy are comparable to those after an open procedure.MethodsThis retrospective case-control study included patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy for resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2013, identified from the National Cancer Database. Propensity score nearest-neighbour 1 : 1 matching was performed between patients undergoing laparoscopic or open distal pancreatectomy based on all relevant co-variables. The primary outcome was overall survival.ResultsOf 1947 eligible patients, 605 (31·1 per cent) underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. After propensity score matching, two well balanced groups of 563 patients each were analysed. There was no difference in overall survival at 3 years after laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy (41·6 versus 36·0 per cent; hazard ratio 0·93, 95 per cent c.i. 0·77 to 1·12; P = 0·457). The overall conversion rate was 27·3 per cent (165 of 605). Patients who underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy had outcomes comparable to those of patients who had an open procedure with regard to median time to chemotherapy (50 versus 50 days; P = 0·342), median number of nodes examined (12 versus 12; P = 0·759); 30-day mortality (1·2 versus 0·9 per cent; P = 0·562); 90-day mortality (2·8 versus 3·7 per cent; P = 0·403), 30-day readmission rate (9·6 versus 9·2 per cent; P = 0·838) and positive margin rate (14·9 versus 18·5 per cent; P = 0·110). However, median duration of hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic group (6 versus 7 days; P < 0·001).ConclusionLaparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is an acceptable alternative to open distal pancreatectomy with no detriment to survival.