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.

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.

Improving post-stroke health outcomes: can facilitated care help?

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were (1) identifying the patterns of post-stroke care, (2) determining the care-provider and patient characteristics associated with optimal management of post-stroke care and (3) estimating the potential influence of various facilitated care policies on outcomes. METHODOLOGY: The 3946 subjects included in the study were admitted to one of Quebec's acute-care hospitals with confirmed diagnosis of stroke and subsequently discharged to their home. The records related to fee-for-service billings of this sample were obtained for the 3 months following discharge and used to define the care-provider path for each stroke survivor. These paths were analyzed and the potential impact of various facilitated care interventions was estimated via a Markov model. RESULTS: The rate of mortality for this sample was 3.2% during the first 3 months after discharge. For the patients who were re-hospitalized, however, the mortality rates were up to 10.3% depending on the care-provider visited prior to re-hospitalization. Our analyses indicate that by avoiding such critical sub-paths via facilitated care, it is possible to achieve improvements in health outcomes as well as cost. DISCUSSION: There is a window of opportunity for improving community-based post-stroke care. Facilitated care policies concerning planned visits upon discharge from hospital or following ER visits can improve the outcomes.

On the significance of reducing the need for stroke patients to visit the emergency department.

We studied the care-provider paths followed by 3,946 patients in Quebec in 2001. We showed that the patients flow during the three months preceding discharge from hospital can be represented by a Markov model with memory. This model enables study of four major scenarios to improve health outcomes, workloads and cost efficiency in the overall community-based care delivery system. Based on the field data, we establish that increasing the availability of specialists, family physicians and general practitioners to mitigate the need for ER visits would be an effective strategy for improvement. A comprehensive policy to support stroke patients needs to incorporate both hospital-based and community-based care delivery processes. The seamless flow of patients through the healthcare providers in such an integrated system is crucial for achieving successful outcomes. Emergency rooms (ER) have a crucial role in this context, since in many cases ER acts as the hospital's "gate keeper", determining if a patient needs to be (re)admitted. In this paper, we establish (based on field data) that mitigating the ER visits of stroke patients improves health outcomes, distribution of workload across the healthcare system as well as associated costs. To this end, we make use of a Markov modeling framework, where the aggregate patient flow information is represented in a compact form through the use of a transition-probability matrix. This allows us to investigate the system-wide impact of several plausible scenarios with regards to the delivery of community-based care to stroke patients who are recently discharged from hospital.