Impact of robotic surgery on patient flow and resource use intensity in ovarian cancer.

There is an emerging focus on the role of robotic surgery in ovarian cancer. To date, the operational and cost implications of the procedure remain unknown. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the impact of integrating minimally invasive robotic surgery on patient flow, resource utilization, and hospital costs associated with the treatment of ovarian cancer during the in-hospital and post-discharge processes. 261 patients operated for the primary treatment of ovarian cancer between January 2006 and November 2014 at a university-affiliated tertiary hospital were included in this study. Outcomes were compared by surgical approach (robotic vs. open surgery) as well as pre- and post-implementation of the robotics platform for use in ovarian cancer. The in-hospital patient flow and number of emergency room visits within 3 months of surgery were evaluated using multi-state Markov models and generalized linear regression models, respectively. Robotic surgery cases were associated with lower rates of postoperative complications, resulted in a more expedited postoperative patient flow (e.g., shorter time in the recovery room, ICU, and inpatient ward), and were between $10,376 and $7,421 less expensive than the average laparotomy, depending on whether or not depreciation and amortization of the robotic platform were included. After discharge, patients who underwent robotic surgery were less likely to return to the ER (IRR 0.42, p = 0.02, and IRR 0.47, p = 0.055, in the univariate and multivariable models, respectively). With appropriate use of the technology, the addition of robotics to the medical armamentarium for the management of ovarian cancer, when clinically feasible, can bring about operational efficiencies and entails cost savings.

Incorporating robotic surgery into the management of ovarian cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: With the rapid uptake of robotic surgery in surgical oncology, its use in the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancers is being evaluated. Complete cytoreduction represents the goal of surgery either at primary cytoreduction or after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the setting of interval cytoreduction. In selected patients, the extent of disease would enable minimally invasive surgery. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of introducing robotic surgery for interval cytoreduction of selected patients with stage III-IV ovarian cancer. METHODS: All patients who underwent surgery from November 2008 to 2014 (concurrent time period when robotic and open surgery were used simultaneously) after receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancer (stage III-IV) were compared with all consecutive patients who underwent cytoreductive surgery by laparotomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy between January 2006 and November 2008. Inclusion criteria included an interval cytoreductive surgery by laparotomy or robotic assistance for stage III-IV non-mucinous epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. Exclusion criteria included patients treated concurrently for a non-gynecologic cancer, as well as secondary cytoreductive surgeries and diagnostic surgeries without an attempt at tumor reduction. Overall survival, progression-free survival, and peri-operative outcomes were compared for the entire patient cohort with those with advanced ovarian cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy immediately before and after the introduction of robotic surgery. RESULTS: A total of 91 patients were selected to undergo interval cytoreduction either via robotic surgery (n=57) or laparotomy (n=34) after the administration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The median age of the cohort was 65 years (range 24-88), 78% had stage III disease, and the median follow-up time was 37 months (5.6-91.4 months). The median survival was 42.8±3.1 months in the period where both robotic surgery and laparotomy were offered compared with 37.9±9.8 months in the time period preceding when only laparotomy was performed (p=0.6). All patients selected to undergo interval robotic cytoreduction following neoadjuvant chemotherapy had a reduction of cancer antigen 125 by at least 80%, resolution of ascites, and CT findings suggesting the potential to achieve optimal interval cytoreduction. All these patients achieved optimal cytoreduction with <1 cm residual disease, including 82% with no residual disease. The median blood loss was 100 mL (mean 135 mL, range 10-1250 mL), and the median hospital stay was 1 day. CONCLUSION: Robotic interval cytoreductive surgery is feasible in well-selected patients. Future studies should aim to define ideal patients for minimally invasive cytoreductive surgery.

Effect of Hospital Choice on the Risk of Caesarean Delivery.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the variation in Caesarean delivery rate (CDR) among hospitals across the United States, its effect on maternal and neonatal outcomes, and whether differences in pregnancy and hospital characteristics can explain the higher CDRs seen in certain hospitals. METHODS: This retrospective population-based cohort study was conducted using the 2014 Healthcare and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample. The investigators identified all hospitals with birth admissions and compared hospitals with high CDRs with hospitals with low/mid CDRs, in terms of hospital characteristics, maternal characteristics, and maternal and neonatal outcomes. Regression analyses within multiple hospital and patient characteristic strata were used to evaluate the adjusted independent effect of the hospital on the risk of Caesarean delivery (Canadian Task Force Classification II-2). RESULTS: In this study population, 96% of U.S. hospitals had a CDR above 20%, and 5% had a CDR >40%. High-CDR hospitals (>40%) were more often privately owned, non-teaching hospitals with an older patient population. When adjusting for baseline obstetrical and hospital characteristics, high-CDR hospitals remained independently associated with an elevated risk of Caesarean delivery. These findings persisted in stratified analyses of each hospital and patient-level characteristic. Obstetrical and neonatal outcomes were comparable in all hospitals irrespective of CDR. CONCLUSION: Hospital characteristics and case mix do not account for the significant variation in CDRs across U.S. hospitals. Individual hospitals are in themselves independent risk factors for Caesarean delivery. Choosing to give birth in a certain hospital may put women at an increased risk of having a Caesarean delivery, without maternal or neonatal benefit.

Effect of Borderline Personality Disorder on Obstetrical and Neonatal Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a serious mental disorder commonly associated with functional impairments and adverse health outcomes. Very little is known about BPD in pregnant women; hence, our study objective was to evaluate the effect of BPD on obstetrical and neonatal outcomes. METHODS: We carried out a retrospective cohort study using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2003 to 2012. We identified births using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) diagnostic and procedure codes and classified women by BPD status. Multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate the effect of BPD on obstetrical and neonatal outcomes, adjusted for subject baseline characteristics. FINDINGS: During the study period, there were 989 births to women with BPD with an overall incidence of 11.65 in 100,000 births. Women with BPD were more likely younger, of lower socioeconomic status, smoked or used drugs, and had an underlying mental disorder. Unadjusted models revealed that BPD was associated with an increased risk of almost all adverse maternal and fetal outcomes we examined, the exception being post partum hemorrhage and instrumental delivery, which both had a null association with BPD, and induction of labor, which was negatively associated with BPD. Upon full adjustment, BPD was found to be associated with the following obstetrical and neonatal outcomes: gestational diabetes (odds ratio [OR], 1.45; 95% CI, 1.13-1.85), premature rupture of the membranes (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.07-1.83), chorioamnionitis (OR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.14-2.39), venous thromboembolism (OR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.12-3.96), caesarian delivery (OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.26-1.64), and preterm birth (OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.29-1.83). CONCLUSION: BPD is associated with several adverse obstetrical and neonatal outcomes. Hence, pregnant women who suffer from BPD should be monitored closely by a multidisciplinary health care team both before and during their pregnancies. This oversight would allow for the receipt of treatment for BPD and also interventions to help them to cease tobacco and drug use, which may ultimately decrease the incidence of poor obstetrical and neonatal outcomes.