Analysis of hospitalization costs and length of stay for oral cancer patients undergoing surgery: Evidence from Hunan, China.

OBJECTIVE: To provide information about hospitalization costs and length of stay (LOS) for inpatients undergoing oral cancer (OC) surgery, and to investigate the association of hospitalization costs and LOS with demographics, tumor subsite, surgery-related and hospital characteristics. METHODS: Data extracted from Chinese National Health Statistics Network Reporting System database in Hunan, China during 2017-2019 were analyzed using quantile regression models. RESULTS: A total of 6,420 OC patients undergoing surgery were identified. After controlling potential compounding variables, the median hospitalization cost was significantly higher in male than in female patientsby $515.70 at the median (p < 0.001). Patients aged over 60 hadsignificantly less costs by $294.85 at the meanthan did those below 60, while no differenceof LOS existed across age. OC patients with neck dissection had significantly higher costs by $1,983.33 at the median than those without (P < 0.001). Regional flaps were the most economical, with lower costs than free flaps by $3,084 (P < 0.001) and the pectoralis major myocutaneous flap (PMMF) by $549.45 (P < 0.001) at the median. CONCLUSION: Male is a significant driver of hospitalization costs and LOS for OC, and age over 60 is associated with lower costs, but not with LOS. Mouth primary site is associated with the highest costs and LOS, while lip primary site the lowest. Absence of neck dissection in early-stage OC can significantly reduce costs and LOS, but its oncological validity needs more evidence. Regional flaps are less expensive than free flaps and the PMMF for oral reconstruction, and are recommended in select patients.

Do betel quid and areca nut chewing deteriorate prognosis of oral cancer? A systematic review, meta-analysis, and research agenda.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the correlations between the habit of betel quid and areca nut (BQ-AN) chewing and the prognosis of oral cancer (OC). METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to clarify this issue. Data searches were performed using PubMed, Web of Science, Epistemonikos, and Embase databases through November 2019. The primary outcome was the difference in the prognosis of OC between BQ-AN chewers and non-chewers, measured in terms of 5-year overall survival (OS) and 5-year disease-specific survival (DSS) log (HR) reported in articles. The pooled HR with 95% CI of 5-year OS and 5-year DSS was calculated using a fixed-effects model. RESULTS: Ten articles with eleven OS or DSS survival studies (one of the articles contained two studies), which were published between 2003 and 2017, were eligible for inclusion in the present study. All the 11 studies were observational studies, among which 10 were retrospective and 1 was prospective. One study measured both OS and DSS. Eight studies, with a total of 2,761 patients, used 5-year OS as the primary endpoint and four studies, with a total of 2,551 patients, used 5-year DSS. Overall, the pooled HR evaluating BQ-AN chewers was 1.26 (95% CI: 1.09-1.46) for 5-year OS and 1.40 (95% CI: 1.15-1.70) for 5-year DSS, compared with non-chewers. There was a significant association between BQ-AN chewing and OC survival. CONCLUSIONS: Betel quid and areca nut chewing is significantly associated with poor prognosis in patients with OC.