Socioeconomic, rural, and insurance-based inequities in robotic lung cancer resections

Loretta Erhunmwunsee,Prasha Bhandari,Ernesto Sosa,Melissa Sur,Philip H. G. Ituarte,Natalie S. Lui

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/vats.2020.02.01

2020-06-01

Abstract:Socioeconomic, rural, and insurance-based inequities in robotic lung cancer resections

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Trends and Disparities in Robotic Surgery Utilization for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Rajika Jindani,Jorge Humberto Rodriguez-Quintero,Mohamed Kamel,Roger Zhu,Marc Vimolratana,Neel Chudgar,Brendon Stiles

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2024.07.008

Abstract:Introduction: Robotic surgery has become an increasingly utilized approach for resectable lung cancer. However, availability may be limited for certain patient populations, underscoring inequity in access to innovative surgical techniques. We hypothesize that there is an association between social determinants of health and robotic surgery utilization for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: We queried the National Cancer Database (2010-2019) for patients with clinical stage I-III NSCLC who underwent resection, stratifying the cohort based on surgical technique. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify associations between sociodemographic and clinicopathologic factors and the robotic approach. Results: Among the 226,455 clinical stage I-III NSCLC patients identified, 34,059 (15%) received robotic resections, 78,039 (34.5%) underwent thoracoscopic resections, and 114,357 (50.5%) had open resections. Robotic surgery utilization increased from 3.1% in 2010 to 34% in 2019 (P < 0.001). Despite this, after adjusting by clinical stage, extent of resection, site of tumor, and receipt of neoadjuvant therapy, multivariable analysis revealed various sociodemographic and treatment facility factors that were associated with underutilization of this approach: lack of insurance (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-0.93), lower income brackets (aOR 0.93, 95% CI 0.91-0.96), provincial settings (urban aOR 0.79, 95% CI 0.76-0.82; rural aOR 0.57, 95% CI 0.51-0.64), and treatment at community centers (comprehensive community cancer programs aOR 0.73, 95% CI 0.70-0.75; community cancer programs aOR 0.51, 95% CI 0.47-0.55). Conclusions: This study suggests that disparities in determinants of health influence accessibility to robotic surgery for resectable NSCLC. Identification of these gaps is crucial to target vulnerable sectors of the population in promoting equality and uniformity in surgical treatment.
Comparison of Robotic and Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery for Lung Cancer: a Propensity-Matched Analysis.

Feichao Bao,Chong Zhang,Yunhai Yang,Zhehao He,Luming Wang,Jian Hu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2016.05.99

2016-01-01

Journal of Thoracic Disease

Abstract:BACKGROUND:Reports of comparison between robotic and thoracoscopic surgery for lung cancer are limited, we aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes of robotic and thoracoscopic anatomic pulmonary resection for lung cancer.METHODS:A total of 184 patients with lung cancer underwent anatomic pulmonary resection by robotics or thoracoscopy. A propensity-matched analysis with incorporated preoperative variables was used to compare the perioperative outcomes between the two procedures.RESULTS:Overall, 71 patients underwent robotic pulmonary resection, including 64 lobectomies and 7 segmentectomies, while 113 patients underwent thoracoscopic lobectomy and segmentectomy. Propensity match produced 69 pairs. The mean length of postoperative stay (7.6±4.6 vs. 6.4±2.6 d, P=0.078), chest tube duration (5.3±3.7 vs. 4.4±1.7 d, P=0.056), number of lymph nodes retrieved (17.9±6.9 vs. 17.4±7.0, P=0.660), stations of lymph nodes resected (7.4±1.6 vs. 7.6±1.7, P=0.563), operative blood loss (53.9±29.3 vs. 50.3±37.9 mL, P=0.531), morbidity rates (42.0% vs. 30.4%, P=0.157) were similar between the robotics and thoracoscopy. However, robotics was associated with higher cost ($12,067±1,610 vs. $8,328±1,004, P<0.001), and longer operative time (136±40 vs. 111±28 min, P<0.001).CONCLUSIONS:Robotics seems to have higher hospital costs and longer operative time, without superior advantages in morbidity rates and oncologic efficiency. Further prospective randomized clinical trials were needed to validate both of its short- and long-term oncologic efficiency.
Early Outcomes of Robotic Versus Thoracoscopic Segmentectomy for Early-Stage Lung Cancer: A Multi-Institutional Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Yajie Zhang,Chun Chen,Jian Hu,Yu Han,Maosheng Huang,Jie Xiang,Hecheng Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.12.112

2020-01-01

Abstract:Objectives: Anatomical segmentectomy via robotic thoracic surgery and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) are minimally invasive surgical approaches for treatment of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, few research studies have compared early outcomes. Methods: A retrospective analysis was made of 774 patients, 298 who received robotic and 476 who received VATS, who underwent minimally invasive segmentectomy for early-stage NSCLC at 3 academic institutions between June 2015 and August 2019. Perioperative outcomes were compared after propensity score-matching on the basis of age, gender, body mass index, percent forced expiratory volume in I second, smoking status, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, type of segmentectomy, tumor size, and institution. Results: There were 257 patients in each group after propensity score-matching. The baseline characteristics and type of segmentectomy were comparable. Three conversions to thoracotomy occurred in the VATS group, and 1 in the robotic group (P = .624). There was no significant difference in operative time (147.91 +/- 52.42 vs 149.23 +/- 49.66 minutes; P = .773), blood loss (50 mL [interquartile range (IQR), 50-100 mL] vs 100 mL [IQR, 30-100 mL]; P = .177), rates of overall complications (17.9 vs 14.8%; P = .340), and length of stay (4 days [IQR, 3-5 days] vs 4 days [IQR, 3-5 days]; P = .417) between the robotic and VATS groups, respectively. Robotic segmentectomy was more costly ($12,019.30 +/- 1678.30 vs $7834.80 +/- 1291.20; P < .001) because of the amortization and consumables of the robotic system. There were a greater number of N1 lymph nodes and N1 stations in the robotic group. Conclusions: Segmentectomy with robotic and VATS are safe and feasible for early-stage NSCLC treatment. A robotic approach might lead to a better N1 lymph node dissection.
Racial disparities in staging, treatment, and mortality in non-small cell lung cancer

Francesca C. Duncan,Nawar Al Nasrallah,Lauren Nephew,Yan Han,Andrew Killion,Hao Liu,Ahmad Al-Hader,Catherine R. Sears

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/tlcr-23-407

2024-01-31

Translational Lung Cancer Research

Abstract:Keywords: Race; lung cancer; surgery; insurance; socioeconomic

oncology,respiratory system
Exploring rural-urban differences in the receipt of nonelective cancer-specific gastrointestinal surgery using a multilevel mixed-effects approach

Crisanto M Torres,Sara Myers,Megan G Janeway,Sabrina E Sanchez,Dane R Scantling,Elizabeth S Davis,Sing Chau Ng,Tracey Dechert,Teviah E Sachs,Kelly M Kenzik

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gassur.2024.10.013

2024-10-16

Abstract:Background: Rural communities constitute a populace marked by various social challenges influencing health outcomes. As such, nonelective surgeries for cancer may have a disproportionate impact on rural populations. We explored patient and county-level factors contributing to differences in the receipt of nonelective cancer-specific surgery between rural and urban residents. Methods: This retrospective study included adult patients captured in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data between January 2008 and December 2015 with an incident stage I to IV cancer of the stomach, liver/intrahepatic bile duct, pancreas, gallbladder/other biliary origin, or small intestine who underwent a cancer-specific surgery. The primary outcome was a nonelective cancer-directed surgery among rural vs urban residents. We conducted a multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression model to adjust for confounders while accounting for county-level clustering. Results: The sample included 10,136 patients who underwent a surgical intervention; 2941 (29%) were nonelective. The incidence of nonelective surgery was lower among rural than urban patients (351 [27%] and 2590 [29%]; P = .05). There was no statistically significant difference in the unadjusted and adjusted odds of nonelective surgery between rural and urban residents (odds ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.76-1.03; P = .11; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.72-1.02; P = .080). In addition, high social vulnerability index (SVI) counties or Black race was significantly associated with increase odds of nonelective surgery (aOR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.07-1.65; P = .009; aOR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.26-1.77; P < .0001, respectively). Conclusion: This study found no difference in the odds of receiving nonelective surgery for gastrointestinal foregut cancers between rural and urban populations. However, Black race and high SVI were associated with higher odds of the receipt of nonelective surgery. Further research is warranted to explore whether disparities in clinical outcomes exist despite the comparable likelihood of receiving nonelective surgery between rural and urban communities.
Disparities Associated with Decision to Undergo Oncologic Surgery: A Prospective Mixed-Methods Analysis

Robert M Van Haren,Melinda Butsch Kovacic,Aaron M Delman,Catherine G Pratt,Azante Griffith,Lana Arbili,Krysten Harvey,Eshika Kohli,Ahna Pai,Alique Topalian,Shesh N Rai,Shimul A Shah,John Kues

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-024-15610-4

Abstract:Background: Underrepresented minority patients with surgical malignancies experience disparities in outcomes. The impact of provider-based factors, including communication, trust, and cultural competency, on outcomes is not well understood. This study examines modifiable provider-based barriers to care experienced by patients with surgical malignancies. Methods: A parallel, prospective, mixed-methods study enrolled patients with lung or gastrointestinal malignancies undergoing surgical consultation. Surveys assessed patients' social needs and patient-physician relationship. Semi-structured interviews ascertained patient experiences and were iteratively analyzed, identifying key themes. Results: The cohort included 24 patients (age 62 years; 63% White and 38% Black/African American). The most common cancers were lung (n = 18, 75%) and gastroesophageal (n = 3, 13%). Survey results indicated that food insecurity (n = 5, 21%), lack of reliable transportation (n = 4, 17%), and housing instability (n = 2, 8%) were common. Lack of trust in their physician (n = 3, 13%) and their physician's treatment recommendation (n = 3, 13%) were identified. Patients reported a lack of empathy (n = 3, 13%), lack of cultural competence (n = 3, 13%), and inadequate communication (n = 2, 8%) from physicians. Qualitative analysis identified five major themes regarding the decision to undergo surgery: communication, trust, health literacy, patient fears, and decision-making strategies. Five patients (21%) declined the recommended surgery and were more likely Black (100% vs. 21%), lower income (100% vs. 16%), and reported poor patient-physician relationship (40% vs. 5%; all p < 0.05). Conclusions: Factors associated with declining recommended cancer surgery were underrepresented minority race and poor patient-physician relationships. Interventions are needed to improve these barriers to care and racial disparities.
Robotics, money and research: is data or physician payments driving robotic bariatric surgery literature?

Andrew N. Parker,Joseph Nguyen-Lee,Efrain Padilla,Mark Mahan,G. Craig Wood,Alexandra Falvo,Ryan D. Horsley,Vladan Obradovic,Anthony T. Petrick

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-11391-9

2024-11-28

Surgical Endoscopy

Abstract:Physician payments from Intuitive Surgical have increased from 37 million to over 53 million per year since 2018. The study was completed to determine the accuracy of conflict of interest (COI) statements and the influence of industry payments on the valuation of the robotic platform.

surgery
Abstract C138: Rural realities: Higher mortality in nonelective cancer surgeries and contributing factors

Crisanto M. Torres,Elizabeth S Davis,Sing Chau Ng,Kelly M. Kenzik

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7755.disp24-c138

2024-09-23

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention

Abstract:Background Rural communities constitute a populace marked by various social challenges influencing health outcomes, with nonelective cancer surgery often serving as an indicator of inadequate healthcare access. This study aims to determine the association between mortality and rurality in patients undergoing nonelective cancer-specific surgery. Additionally, we examine how patient and county-level factors contribute to mortality differences across rural and metropolitan areas. We hypothesize that rural patients experience worse mortality outcomes than metropolitan patients, influenced by race and social determinants. Methods A retrospective study of adult patients captured in the SEER-Medicare data between January 2008 and December 2015. Patients with an incident cancer of the stomach, liver, pancreas, gallbladder, or other biliary origin and who underwent a nonelective cancer-specific surgery were included. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality across the urban-rural continuum categorized as metropolitan (metro), micropolitan (micro), or small town or rural (rural) derived from the 2013 US Department of Agriculture's Rural-Urban Continuum Codes. We used a multivariable mixed effects model to assess differences in 90-day mortality across the urban-rural continuum while accounting for county-level clustering. The model included age, sex, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, cancer sites, cancer stage, race, social vulnerability index [SVI], teaching status, and bed size. A nonlinear effect decomposition analysis evaluated the influence of demographic and clinical characteristics on the mortality difference between metropolitan and non-metropolitan residents. ResultsIn total, 2,196 underwent nonelective surgery; metro 1,952 (89%), micro 156 (7%), and rural 88 (4%). The incidence of 90-day mortality was similar across the urban-rural continuum: metro (22%), micro (21%), and rural (25%); p= 0.77. Rural residents had 2.06 higher adjusted odds of 90-day mortality (aOR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.02-4.14) compared to metropolitan residents. However, there was no difference in the aOR of 90-day mortality between micropolitan (aOR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.44-1.33) and metropolitan residents. The effect decomposition demonstrated that the mortality difference between metro and non-metro residents was influenced mainly by race (22%), high SVI (8%), and anatomical cancer site (11%). Conclusion Despite the comparable likelihood of receiving nonelective surgery across the urban-rural continuum, rural patients face a distinct disadvantage in postoperative survival. The significant contribution of factors such as race and socioeconomic vulnerability to the observed mortality differences underscores the complexity of healthcare disparities in rural areas. This study highlights the need for policymakers and healthcare providers to address the systemic inequities faced by rural populations. Enhancing access to quality healthcare, improving socioeconomic conditions, and addressing racial disparities should be prioritized to reduce the mortality gap. Citation Format: Crisanto M. Torres, Elizabeth S Davis, Sing Chau Ng, Kelly M. Kenzik. Rural realities: Higher mortality in nonelective cancer surgeries and contributing factors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 17th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2024 Sep 21-24; Los Angeles, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2024;33(9 Suppl) nr C138.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health
Robotic Lung Cancer Surgery: from Simple to Complex, from Surgery to Clinical Study.

Yu Han,Yajie Zhang,Chengqiang Li,Sheng Yang,Hecheng Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2019.09.79

2020-01-01

Journal of Thoracic Disease

Abstract:The robotic surgical system has been increasingly utilized for thoracic surgeries in recent years. For the treatment of lung cancer, the safety and feasibility of robotic lobectomy, segmentectomy, and even sleeve resection have been demonstrated by a series studies (1-3). Robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) was initiated in May 2015 in our department, and, as of June 2019, more than 1,000 cases have been performed, including lung surgery, esophagectomy for esophageal tumors, and mediastinal tumor resection. For robotic-assisted lung surgery, 530 patients underwent lobectomy, 204 patients underwent segmentectomy, and 8 patients underwent sleeve resection. We started from robotic lobectomy and segmentectomy, and sleeve resection was carried out when we acquired greater proficiency of the robotic surgical technique. To summarize our experience and improve the efficacy of robotic lung cancer surgery, several retrospective studies and prospective clinical trials have been conducted in our department.
Trends and Disparities in Curative-Intent Treatment for Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Population-Based Analysis of Surgery and SBRT

Qinran Liu,Heidy N. Medina,Estelamari Rodriguez,Kamaria T. Jacobs,Clyde Brown,Tulay Koru-Sengul,Gilberto Lopes,Paulo S. Pinheiro

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-23-1182

2024-01-23

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention

Abstract:Background: Despite the increasing adoption of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) as a recommended alternative for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), population-based research on racial/ethnic disparities in curative-intent treatment accounting for SBRT remains limited. This study investigated trends and disparities in receiving curative-intent surgery and/or SBRT in a diverse, retrospective cohort. Methods: Early-stage NSCLC cases (2005-2017) from the Florida cancer registry were linked to individual-level statewide discharge data containing comorbidities and specific treatment information. Joinpoint regression assessed trends in treatment receipt. Multivariable logistic regression examined associations between race/ethnicity and treatment type. Results: Among 64,999 early-stage NSCLC patients, 71.6% received curative-intent treatment (surgery and/or SBRT): 73.1%, 72.4%, and 60.3% among Hispanic, White, and Black patients, respectively (P<0.01). SBRT use increased steeply from 2005-2007 and then by 7.9% annually from 2007-2017 (P<0.01); curative-intent surgery remained stable from 2005-2014 before declining by 6.2% annually during 2014-2017 (P=0.04). The Black-White disparity in receipt of curative-intent treatment was significant (ORadj, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.60-0.71). Patients with Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI)≥3 had 36% (ORadj, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.60-0.69) lower odds of receiving curative-intent surgery and no significant difference for SBRT (ORadj, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.93-1.20) compared to CCI=0. Conclusions: Racial disparities in receiving curative-intent treatment for early-stage NSCLC persist despite the availability of SBRT, suggesting the full potential of curative-intent treatment for early-stage NSCLC remains unachieved. Impact: Addressing disparities in early-stage NSCLC requires addressing differential treatment patterns and enhancing accessibility to treatments like underutilized SBRT, particularly for high-comorbidity populations such as Black patients.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health
Racial and socioeconomic disparities in lung cancer screening in the United States: A systematic review

Ernesto Sosa,Gail D’Souza,Aamna Akhtar,Melissa Sur,Kyra Love,Jeanette Duffels,Dan J. Raz,Jae Y. Kim,Virginia Sun,Loretta Erhunmwunsee

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21671

2021-05-20

Abstract:<p>Nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the leading cause of cancer deaths. Lung cancer screening (LCS) reduces NSCLC mortality; however, a lack of diversity in LCS studies may limit the generalizability of the results to marginalized groups who face higher risk for and worse outcomes from NSCLC. Identifying sources of inequity in the LCS pipeline is essential to reduce disparities in NSCLC outcomes. The authors searched 3 major databases for studies published from January 1, 2010 to February 27, 2020 that met the following criteria: 1) included screenees between ages 45 and 80 years who were current or former smokers, 2) written in English, 3) conducted in the United States, and 4) discussed socioeconomic and race-based LCS outcomes. Eligible studies were assessed for risk of bias. Of 3721 studies screened, 21 were eligible. Eligible studies were evaluated, and their findings were categorized into 3 themes related to LCS disparities faced by Black and socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals: 1) eligibility; 2) utilization, perception, and utility; and 3) postscreening behavior and care. Disparities in LCS exist along racial and socioeconomic lines. There are several steps along the LCS pipeline in which Black and socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals miss the potential benefits of LCS, resulting in increased mortality. This study identified potential sources of inequity that require further investigation. The authors recommend the implementation of prospective trials that evaluate eligibility criteria for underserved groups and the creation of interventions focused on improving utilization and follow-up care to decrease LCS disparities.</p>

oncology
Cost comparison between medicare and private insurance for robotic transhiatal esophagectomy

Michelle M Dugan,Sharona B Ross,Iswanto Sucandy,Moran Slavin,Tara M Pattilachan,Maria Christodoulou,Alexander Rosemurgy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01762-0

2024-01-17

Abstract:Esophageal cancer is a significant health concern, with the robotic platform being increasingly adopted for transhiatal esophagectomy (THE). While literature exists regarding the cost of robotic THE and its benefits, there is limited data analyzing cost and concurrent hospital reimbursement based on payor or provider. This study aimed to compare hospital reimbursement after robotic THE for patients with Medicare versus private insurance. With IRB approval, a prospective study of 85 patients from 2012 to 2022 who underwent robotic THE was conducted. Private insurance was defined as coverage excluding Medicare, Medicaid, or self-pay. Statistical analyses involved Student's t test, Chi-square test, and Fisher's exact test, with p ≤ 0.05 considered statistically significant. Data are presented as median (mean ± standard deviation). Among the 85 patients, 64 had Medicare, and 21 had private insurance. Medicare patients exhibited more frequent history of prior abdominal or thoracic surgeries (41% vs 10%, p < 0.01). Both groups showed no differences in factors like sex, body mass index, ASA classification, operative duration, estimated blood loss, conversions to 'open', tumor size, and major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III). Similarly, metrics such as hospital stay duration, in-hospital mortality, 30-day readmission, and various financial components including total and variable costs, hospital reimbursement, and net margin were consistent across both. Despite Medicare patients being older and often having a broader operative history, hospital costs and reimbursements did not differ from patients with private insurance post-robotic THE. The robotic platform appears to mitigate potential disparities in hospitalization costs and hospital reimbursement for THE between Medicare and private insurance.
Robotic availability, not payor status, determines access to robotic emergency general surgery hernia repair in California and Florida

Louis A. Perkins,Jarrett E. Santorelli,Kendra M. Black,Laura M. Adams,Garth Jacobsen,Amy E. Liepert,Jay J. Doucet

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-11283-y

2024-10-12

Surgical Endoscopy

Abstract:Previous studies have demonstrated that access to robotic surgery is influenced by socioeconomic factors, including insurance status. The 2010 Affordable Care Act established an avenue for states to expand Medicaid coverage, which has increased access to surgical care for many conditions. We hypothesized that socioeconomic disparities in access to robotic repair of non-elective emergency general surgery (EGS) hernias are less prevalent in California, a Medicaid expansion state, compared to Florida, which has not adopted Medicaid expansion.

surgery
Comparing Robotic, Thoracoscopic, and Open Segmentectomy: A National Cancer Database Analysis

Raul Caso,Thomas J Watson,Eshetu Tefera,Robert Cerfolio,Abbas E Abbas,John F Lazar,Marc Margolis,Ann E Hwalek,Puja Gaur Khaitan,Thomas J. Watson,Abbas E. Abbas,John F. Lazar,Ann E. Hwalek

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2024.01.028

IF: 2.417

2024-04-01

Journal of Surgical Research

Abstract:INTRODUCTION: Minimally invasive approaches to lung resection have become widely acceptable and more recently, segmentectomy has demonstrated equivalent oncologic outcomes when compared to lobectomy for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, studies comparing outcomes following segmentectomy by different surgical approaches are lacking. Our objective was to investigate the outcomes of patients undergoing robotic, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), or open segmentectomy for NSCLC using the National Cancer Database.METHODS: NSCLC patients with clinical stage I who underwent segmentectomy from 2010 to 2016 were identified. After propensity-score matching (1:4:1), multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to determine predictors of 30-d readmissions, 90-d mortality, and overall survival.RESULTS: 22,792 patients met study inclusion. After matching, approaches included robotic (n = 2493; 17%), VATS (n = 9972; 66%), and open (n = 2493; 17%). An open approach was associated with higher 30-d readmissions (7% open versus 5.5% VATS versus 5.6% robot, P = 0.033) and 90-d mortality (4.4% open versus 2.2% VATS versus 2.5% robot, P < 0.001). A robotic approach was associated with improved 5-y survival (50% open versus 58% VATS versus 63% robot, P < 0.001).CONCLUSIONS: For patients with clinical stage I NSCLC undergoing segmentectomy, compared to the open approach, a VATS approach was associated with lower 30-d readmission and 90-d mortality. A robotic approach was associated with improved 5-y survival compared to open and VATS approaches when matched. Additional studies are necessary to determine if unrecognized covariates contribute to these differences.

surgery
ROBOTIC SURGERY FOR LUNG CANCER

Franca Melfi,Federico Davini,Olivia Fanucchi,Ralph A. Schmid,Alfredo Mussi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5152/tcb.2012.28

2012-01-01

Toraks Cerrahisi Bulteni

Abstract:Major lung resections by minimally invasive surgery (MIS) represent an effective technique for treatment of early stage lung cancer.Many published papers have demonstrated that this approach (Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery-VATS) may have some advantages over thoracotomy.However, concerns still remain, especially in terms of lack of standardization of operative technique, technical limitations such as impaired vision, restricted instrument-maneuverability and unstable camera platform.Recently, robots have been introduced into surgical practice in an attempt to facilitate minimally invasive surgical performance.The three-dimensional view with depth perception is a marked improvement over the 2 dimensional conventional thoracoscopic camera.Combined with the increased degrees of freedom and enhanced dexterity of the robotic arms, the surgeon's ability is enhanced to render surgical operations feasible that are technically difficult or even impossible by using traditional minimally invasive techniques.This article describes general aspects, indications, advantages and disadvantages of this new technique in thoracic surgery in performing major lung resections for treatment of early lung cancer.
Hospital readmissions after robotic hepatectomy for neoplastic disease: Analysis of risk factors, survival, and economical impact. A logistical regression and propensity score matched study

Michelle M Dugan,Sharona Ross,Maria Christodoulou,Tara M Pattilachan,Jeilianis Adorno Flores,Alexander Rosemurgy,Iswanto Sucandy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2024.03.014

Abstract:Background: As the first comprehensive investigation into hospital readmissions following robotic hepatectomy for neoplastic disease, this study aims to fill a critical knowledge gap by evaluating risk factors associated with readmission and their impact on survival and the financial burden. Methods: The study analyzed a database of robotic hepatectomy patients, comparing readmitted and non-readmitted individuals post-operatively using 1:1 propensity score matching. Statistical methods included Chi-square, Mann-Whitney U, T-test, binomial logistic regression, and Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: Among 244 patients, 44 were readmitted within 90 days. Risk factors included hypertension (p = 0.01), increased Child-Pugh score (p < 0.01), and R1 margin status (p = 0.05). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy correlated with lower readmission risk (p = 0.045). Readmissions didn't significantly impact five-year survival (p = 0.42) but increased fixed indirect hospital costs (p < 0.01). Conclusions: Readmission post-robotic hepatectomy correlates with hypertension, higher Child-Pugh scores, and R1 margins. The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a lower admission rate due to less diffuse liver disease in these patients. While not affecting survival, readmissions elevate healthcare costs.
High-risk rural surgical patients and poor access to elective colorectal cancer surgery: insight for multilevel intervention for rural America

Yanick Tadé,Jillian Timperley,Danielle Dilsaver,James McDermott,Nicole de Rosa,Waddah B Al-Refaie

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gassur.2024.08.011

2024-09-05

Abstract:Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of death in rural America. Rural populations are large and heterogeneous, yet patient-related drivers of inequities in CRC access are understudied. This study aimed to identify vulnerable rural populations at lower odds of undergoing elective CRC surgery. Methods: Evaluation of the Policy Map and United States Census Bureau identified factors associated with poor surgical access in the most populous states (by total rural population). To assess whether these identified factors were associated with reduced access to elective CRC surgery, the 2007 to 2020 National Inpatient Sample was used to evaluate 69,212 hospitalizations of rural patients undergoing CRC surgery. Rural was defined as counties with a population of <250,000. Multivariable logistic regression models assessed predictors of elective CRC surgery. Patient- and hospital-level factor interactions were specified a priori. Results: More than 72% of hospitalizations of rural patients were elective. Multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that older age, multimorbidity, Black race, Latino-Hispanic ethnicity, Medicaid insurance, and rural hospitals predicted lower odds of elective CRC surgery. On interaction analyses, high-risk patients were less likely to undergo elective CRC surgery in urban facilities relative to rural. Conclusion: In this large study of rural dwellers, ethnoracial minorities, elders, and Medicaid beneficiaries had profoundly less access to elective CRC surgery, especially when care was received in urban settings. Future studies should focus on exploring actionable social drivers of health in these rural populations. Findings underscore the need for multilevel interventions to enhance rural access to equitable and quality surgical cancer care.
Perioperative outcomes for single-port robotic versus single-incision laparoscopic surgery: a comparative analysis in colorectal cancer surgery

Deborah S. Keller,Thais Reif de Paula,Taylor P. Ikner,Hela Saidi,Henry Schoonyoung,John H Marks

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-023-10629-2

2024-01-06

Surgical Endoscopy

Abstract:Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) may offer improved cosmesis, reduced postoperative pain and faster recovery than conventional platforms, but widespread implementation was limited by technical demands. A single-port robotic platform was recently introduced, with components that further enhance SILS benefits without the technical challenges. No study to date has compared the two platforms to validate benefits. Our goal was to compare outcomes of SP robotics and SILS in colorectal cancer (CRC).

surgery
Associations of Socioeconomic Variables with Resection, Stage, and Survival in Patients with Early-Stage Pancreatic Cancer.

Mia Shapiro,Qi Chen,Qin Huang,Valia A. Boosalis,Charles H. Yoon,Mandeep S. Saund,Edward E. Whang,Jason S. Gold

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2015.4239

2015-01-01

JAMA Surgery

Abstract:IMPORTANCE Socioeconomic variables including sex, race, ethnicity, marital status, and insurance status are associated with survival in pancreatic cancer. It remains unknown exactly how these variables influence survival, including whether they affect stage at presentation or receipt of treatment or are independently associated with outcomes.OBJECTIVES To investigate the relationship between socioeconomic factors and odds of resection in early-stage, resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma and to determine whether these same factors were independently associated with survival in patients who underwent resection.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This was a retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed as having T1 through T3 M0 pancreatic adenocarcinoma between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2011, identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Socioeconomic and geographic variables associated with utilization of resection and disease-specific survival.RESULTS A total of 17 530 patients with localized, nonmetastatic pancreatic cancer were identified. The resection rate among these patients was 45.4% and did not change over time. Utilization of resection was independently associated with white vs African American race (odds ratio [OR]=0.76; 95% CI, 0.65-0.88; P<.001), non-Hispanic ethnicity (for Hispanic, OR=0.72; 95% CI, 0.60-0.85; P<.001), married status (OR=1.42; 95% CI, 1.30-1.57; P<.001), insurance coverage (OR=1.63; 95% CI, 1.22-2.18; P=.001), and the Northeast region (vs Southeast, OR=1.67; 95% CI, 1.44-1.94; P<.001). Stage at presentation correlated with sex, race, ethnicity, marital status, and geographic region (ethnicity, P=.003; all others, P<.001); however, the factors associated with increased resection correlated with more advanced stage. Patients who underwent resection had significantly improved disease-specific survival compared with those who did not undergo resection (median, 21 vs 6 months; hazard ratio [HR] for disease-specific death=0.32; 95% CI, 0.31-0.33; P<.001). Disease-specific survival among the patients who underwent surgical resection was independently associated with geographic region, with patients in the Pacific West (HR for death=0.706; 95% CI, 0.628-0.793), Northeast (HR for death=0.766; 95% CI, 0.667-0.879), and Midwest (HR for death=0.765; 95% CI, 0.640-0.913) having improved survival in comparison with those in the Southeast (all P<.001).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Disparities in the utilization of surgical resection for patients with early-stage, resectable pancreatic cancer are associated with socioeconomic variables including race, ethnicity, marital status, insurance status, and geographic location. Of these factors, only geographic location is independently associated with survival in patients undergoing resection.
Trends in Racial and Ethnic Differences in Declined Surgery for Resectable Malignancies in the United States

Vishal R Patel,Michael Liu,Rebecca A Snyder,Andrew P Loehrer,Alex B Haynes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000006516

2024-09-03

Abstract:Objective: To assess trends in patients' decisions to decline cancer surgery in the United States by race and ethnicity. Background: Racial and ethnic differences in declining potentially curative cancer surgery are suggested to be due to systemic inequities in healthcare access and mistrust of healthcare systems, among other factors. Despite ongoing national efforts to address these inequities, it is unknown whether differences in rates of declined cancer surgery have improved. Methods: Using population-based data from the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program from 2000 to 2019, we studied individuals with non-metastatic cancer who were recommended surgery. Racial and ethnic differences in risk-adjusted rates of declined surgery were evaluated by year and cancer site using mixed-effects logistic regression. Results: Of 2,740,129 patients with resectable, non-metastatic cancer, Black patients had the highest rates of declined surgery (2.10% [95% CI, 1.91-2.31%]) while White patients had the lowest (1.04% [95% CI, 0.95-1.14%]). From 2000 to 2019, racial and ethnic differences in declined surgery did not change significantly, except for a decrease in the difference between Hispanic and White patients (difference-in-difference, -0.4% [95% CI, -0.71% to -0.09%]). When stratified by cancer site, Black-White differences in rates of declined surgery decreased significantly (but were not eliminated) for four of fifteen sites (esophageal, pancreatic, lung, and kidney) ( P <0.001). Conclusions: Patients from racial and ethnic minority groups were more likely to decline surgical intervention for potentially curable malignancies and these differences have persisted over time. Further work is needed to understand the causes of these differences and identify opportunities for improvement.

Socioeconomic, rural, and insurance-based inequities in robotic lung cancer resections

Trends and Disparities in Robotic Surgery Utilization for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Comparison of Robotic and Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery for Lung Cancer: a Propensity-Matched Analysis.

Early Outcomes of Robotic Versus Thoracoscopic Segmentectomy for Early-Stage Lung Cancer: A Multi-Institutional Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Racial disparities in staging, treatment, and mortality in non-small cell lung cancer

Exploring rural-urban differences in the receipt of nonelective cancer-specific gastrointestinal surgery using a multilevel mixed-effects approach

Disparities Associated with Decision to Undergo Oncologic Surgery: A Prospective Mixed-Methods Analysis

Robotics, money and research: is data or physician payments driving robotic bariatric surgery literature?

Abstract C138: Rural realities: Higher mortality in nonelective cancer surgeries and contributing factors

Robotic Lung Cancer Surgery: from Simple to Complex, from Surgery to Clinical Study.

Trends and Disparities in Curative-Intent Treatment for Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Population-Based Analysis of Surgery and SBRT

Racial and socioeconomic disparities in lung cancer screening in the United States: A systematic review

Cost comparison between medicare and private insurance for robotic transhiatal esophagectomy

Robotic availability, not payor status, determines access to robotic emergency general surgery hernia repair in California and Florida

Comparing Robotic, Thoracoscopic, and Open Segmentectomy: A National Cancer Database Analysis

ROBOTIC SURGERY FOR LUNG CANCER

Hospital readmissions after robotic hepatectomy for neoplastic disease: Analysis of risk factors, survival, and economical impact. A logistical regression and propensity score matched study

High-risk rural surgical patients and poor access to elective colorectal cancer surgery: insight for multilevel intervention for rural America

Perioperative outcomes for single-port robotic versus single-incision laparoscopic surgery: a comparative analysis in colorectal cancer surgery

Associations of Socioeconomic Variables with Resection, Stage, and Survival in Patients with Early-Stage Pancreatic Cancer.

Trends in Racial and Ethnic Differences in Declined Surgery for Resectable Malignancies in the United States