Search

Objective: Utilization of minimally invasive surgical modalities for lobectomy is increasing. Lobectomy can be associated with notable rates of readmission. As use of these modalities increases, evaluation of the impact on readmission is warranted., Methods: Data from the Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council were used to identify lobectomy operations performed in Pennsylvania from 2011 through 2014. Operations were stratified by approach: open, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) or robotic. Differences in patient characteristics were assessed with analysis of variance and chi-squared tests. Logistic regression modeled risk of 30-day readmission and linear regression modeled length of stay (LOS) after controlling for confounders., Results: We evaluated 4,939 lobectomy operations (2,501 open, 1,944 VATS, 494 robotic) with 583 readmissions (11.8%). Robotic cases increased 333% over 4 years. VATS and open cases increased 38% and 22%, respectively. Surgical approach was not associated with hospital readmission (VATS odds ratio (OR) = 0.95; P = 0.632; and robotic OR = 1.02; P = 0.916). Longer LOS was associated with a greater likelihood of readmission (OR = 1.58; P = 0.002). LOS was 1 day less for VATS ( P < 0.001) and 1.5 days less for robotic lobectomy ( P < 0.001) when compared to an open approach. The most common reasons for readmission were respiratory complications and nonrespiratory infection., Conclusions: Surgical approach does not directly affect readmission. However, minimally invasive lobectomy appears to be associated with shorter LOS and results in more patients discharged home. Decreased LOS and discharge home are associated with fewer readmissions.

Objective: Minimally invasive approaches to lobectomy are increasing. Rates of conversion to thoracotomy are well reported but risk factors are poorly understood. This study aimed to determine the impact of surgical modality (video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery [VATS] and robotic) on conversion as well as to identify other risk factors for conversion., Methods: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was used to identify patients who underwent minimally invasive lobectomy between 2010 and 2015. Patient characteristics were compared between VATS and robotic approaches using chi-squared tests and t -tests. Logistic regression models were used to control for covariates and identify factors associated with all minimally invasive conversion, VATS conversion, and robotic conversion. Propensity score matching was used to compare conversion rates of VATS and robotic lobectomy., Results: The study included 51,723 patients with lung cancer who underwent minimally invasive lobectomy (VATS or robotic). Conversion was identified in 7,109 (7.3%) operations. The odds of VATS conversions were nearly twice that of robotic conversions (OR 1.94 P < 0.0001). After controlling for VATS and robotic patient imbalances with propensity score matching, there was a 5% difference in conversion rates (14% vs. 9%, P < 0.0001). Other predictors of minimally invasive conversion included community hospitals, tumor size 4.5 cm or greater, and an increasing Charlson comorbidity index ( P < 0.03 for all)., Conclusions: VATS is associated with nearly twice the odds of conversion as robotic lobectomy. Identifying specific risk factors for both VATS and robotic conversions may aid in appropriate modality selection and reduction of conversions.