ArticleFrontiers in public health2022
The value of surgical admissions for malignant uterine cancer. A comparative analysis of robotic, laparoscopic, and laparotomy surgery in a university hospital.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Robotic surgery for malignant uterine cancer raises issue of economic sustainability for providers. The objective of this study was to assess the value of surgical admissions for malignant uterine cancer in a University Hospital through an analysis of their costs and outcomes by comparing three different surgical approaches (laparotomy, laparoscopic, and robotic surgery). Methods: Hospitalizations between 1 January 2019 and 31 October 2021 for malignant uterine cancer surgery were selected and stratified. For each surgical approach, mean values (with 95% confidence intervals, CI) were calculated for cost items. Moreover, 30-day readmission frequency was calculated for the three approaches compared to each other. ANOVA and Student's Results: A total of 1,336 hospitalizations were included in the study, 366 with robotic, 591 with laparoscopic, and 379 with laparotomy surgery. Robotic surgery, compared to laparoscopic and laparotomy ones, showed a statistically significant difference Conclusion: Break-even analysis could be a useful tool to support hospital management in planning and governance of malignant uterine cancer surgery. Systematic application of this tool will allow defining over time right distribution of robotic, laparoscopic, and laparotomy surgeries' volumes to perform to ensure both quality and economic-financial balance and therefore value of uterine oncological surgery. Concerning research, this study paves the way for a multicentric study, the extension of outcomes of malignant uterine surgery to be considered and assessed, and the future inclusion of other therapeutic interventions in the analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.