Inpatient lung cancer surgery outcomes in Illinois

IF 0.6 Q4 SURGERY Surgery in practice and science Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.sipas.2023.100206
Ayaan Ahmed , Charles D. Logan , David D. Odell , Joe Feinglass
{"title":"Inpatient lung cancer surgery outcomes in Illinois","authors":"Ayaan Ahmed ,&nbsp;Charles D. Logan ,&nbsp;David D. Odell ,&nbsp;Joe Feinglass","doi":"10.1016/j.sipas.2023.100206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>This study analyzed inpatient mortality and length of stay for lung cancer surgery in Illinois hospitals by patient clinical and demographic characteristics, procedure types, and hospital and surgeon volume.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The study analyzed lung cancer patients who underwent lobectomy or sublobar resection at Illinois hospitals from 2016 to June 2022. Trends in procedure type, inpatient mortality, one-day length of stay (LOS), and prolonged LOS (&gt;10 days) were evaluated. Regression models were used to determine the likelihood of inpatient death and length of stay while controlling for clinical, procedure, hospital, and surgeon characteristics.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>There were 9602 admissions for lung cancer surgery at 89 non-federal Illinois hospitals. Overall, 0.7% of patients died, 12.2% of patients had one-day LOS, and 7.4% patients had prolonged LOS. From 2016 to 2022, rates of one-day LOS increased from approximately 5% to 23%, prolonged LOS dropped from almost 18% to under 5%, robotic lobectomies increased from &lt;5% of procedures to over 40%, and VATS lobectomies went from almost 50% to 13%. The proportion of open lobectomy procedures remained stable. Robotic and VATS procedures were generally associated with better outcomes; however, VATS sublobar procedures were associated with worse LOS and mortality outcomes. Hospitals and surgeons with higher procedure volumes had significantly better outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Lung cancer surgery had low inpatient mortality and better LOS outcomes, with robotic steadily replacing VATS procedures. Higher hospital or surgeon volume was associated with better patient outcomes and may have been related to the greater utilization of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Programs.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74890,"journal":{"name":"Surgery in practice and science","volume":"14 ","pages":"Article 100206"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgery in practice and science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666262023000529","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

This study analyzed inpatient mortality and length of stay for lung cancer surgery in Illinois hospitals by patient clinical and demographic characteristics, procedure types, and hospital and surgeon volume.

Methods

The study analyzed lung cancer patients who underwent lobectomy or sublobar resection at Illinois hospitals from 2016 to June 2022. Trends in procedure type, inpatient mortality, one-day length of stay (LOS), and prolonged LOS (>10 days) were evaluated. Regression models were used to determine the likelihood of inpatient death and length of stay while controlling for clinical, procedure, hospital, and surgeon characteristics.

Results

There were 9602 admissions for lung cancer surgery at 89 non-federal Illinois hospitals. Overall, 0.7% of patients died, 12.2% of patients had one-day LOS, and 7.4% patients had prolonged LOS. From 2016 to 2022, rates of one-day LOS increased from approximately 5% to 23%, prolonged LOS dropped from almost 18% to under 5%, robotic lobectomies increased from <5% of procedures to over 40%, and VATS lobectomies went from almost 50% to 13%. The proportion of open lobectomy procedures remained stable. Robotic and VATS procedures were generally associated with better outcomes; however, VATS sublobar procedures were associated with worse LOS and mortality outcomes. Hospitals and surgeons with higher procedure volumes had significantly better outcomes.

Conclusions

Lung cancer surgery had low inpatient mortality and better LOS outcomes, with robotic steadily replacing VATS procedures. Higher hospital or surgeon volume was associated with better patient outcomes and may have been related to the greater utilization of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Programs.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
伊利诺伊州住院肺癌手术的结果
目的:本研究根据患者临床和人口学特征、手术类型、医院和外科医生数量分析伊利诺斯州医院肺癌手术的住院死亡率和住院时间。方法分析2016年至2022年6月在伊利诺伊州医院接受肺叶切除术或叶下切除术的肺癌患者。评估了手术类型、住院死亡率、一天住院时间(LOS)和延长的LOS(10天)的趋势。回归模型用于确定住院患者死亡的可能性和住院时间,同时控制临床、手术、医院和外科医生的特征。结果伊利诺斯州89家非联邦医院共收治肺癌手术9602例。总体而言,0.7%的患者死亡,12.2%的患者有一天的LOS, 7.4%的患者有延长的LOS。从2016年到2022年,一天LOS的比例从大约5%上升到23%,长期LOS的比例从近18%下降到5%以下,机器人肺叶切除术的比例从5%上升到40%以上,VATS肺叶切除术的比例从近50%上升到13%。开放式肺叶切除术的比例保持稳定。机器人和VATS手术通常与更好的结果相关;然而,VATS叶下手术与较差的LOS和死亡率结果相关。手术量大的医院和外科医生的结果明显更好。结论肺癌手术具有较低的住院死亡率和较好的LOS结果,机器人稳步取代VATS手术。更高的医院或外科医生数量与更好的患者预后相关,并且可能与术后增强恢复计划的更高利用率有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
38 days
期刊最新文献
Emergency laparotomy preoperative risk assessment tool performance: A systematic review Letter to the Editor on “The pulmonary contusion score: Development of asimple scoring system for blunt lung injury” Prevalence and associated factors of acute postoperative pain in adult surgical patients: A prospective study Advances and results in omental patch repair of gastrointestinal perforations: A narrative review Practical evaluation of risk factors in patients with osteoporosis-induced thoracic and lumbar vertebral compression fractures requiring surgery
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1