Outcomes and Healthcare Cost Associated with Single Anesthesia Events for Surgical Resection of Early Stage Lung Cancer
Presented During:
Sunday, May 4, 2025: 9:00AM - 4:00PM
Seattle Convention Center | Summit
Posted Room Name:
Poster Area, Exhibit Hall
Abstract No:
P0185
Submission Type:
Abstract Submission
Authors:
Jordan Dozier (1), Brian Pettiford (2), Reginald Du (3), Christopher Zumwalt (3), Katrina Jiang (4)
Institutions:
(1) Ochsner Medical Center, new orleans, LA, (2) N/A, N/A, (3) Ochsner Health, New Orleans, LA, (4) Ochsner Medical Center, Sacramento, CA
Submitting Author:
Jordan Dozier
-
Contact Me
Ochsner Medical Center
Ochsner Medical Center
Co-Author(s):
Brian Pettiford
-
Contact Me
N/A
N/A
Reginald Du
-
Contact Me
Ochsner Health
Ochsner Health
Christopher Zumwalt
-
Contact Me
Ochsner Health
Ochsner Health
Katrina Jiang
-
Contact Me
Ochsner Medical Center
Ochsner Medical Center
Presenting Author:
Jordan Dozier
-
Contact Me
Ochsner Medical Center
Ochsner Medical Center
Abstract:
Objective: To evaluate whether a single anesthesia event (SAE), which combines diagnosis (obtained via robotic bronchoscopy) and treatment (via robotic surgery), reduces time to treatment initiation (TTI) and cost compared to the standard of care in patients with early-stage lung cancer.
Methods: Patients who underwent biopsy and resection for early-stage lung cancer from October 2021 to August 2024 were identified and grouped based on type of surgical event: SAE vs. standard of care. In the SAE cohort, patients underwent biopsy, rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE), and resection during a single anesthetic encounter. In the standard of care cohort, patients underwent biopsy of a suspicious pulmonary lesion on a separate day from the subsequent surgical resection of the lesion (traditional). Patient characteristics and outcomes were retrospectively analyzed and compared between the two cohorts.
Results: A total of 61 patients (42 traditional, 19 SAE) were included in this study. There were no significant differences in terms of age, gender, preoperative FEV1, preoperative DLCO, and smoking history in pack-years. All but one patient (traditional) had stage 1 disease, though median nodule size was higher in the traditional cohort (2.1 vs 1.5 p=.0342). Adenocarcinoma was the most common histologic type in both cohorts. The median number of days from diagnostic CT to tumor resection was 84.5 days for the traditional patients vs. 48.0 days for the patients that underwent SAE (p<0.0001). The median number of days from the initial consultation with the pulmonologist to tumor resection was 62.5 days for the traditional cohort vs. 38.0 days for the SAE cohort (p=0.0021). Length of stay was 1 day shorter for the SAE cohort (2 vs 3; P=.3511). There were no complications in the SAE cohort, compared to 11 in the traditional cohort. There was no significant difference in cost between the two pathways, but the Net Revenue was higher in the SAE cohort (p=.0348)
Conclusions: When compared to the traditional pathway, the SAE approach to diagnosing and treating lung cancer reduces the TTI compared to the standard of care. In addition, the SAE approach resulted in fewer complications, a shorter length of stay, and increased net revenue. We propose that this more streamlined approach decreases patient anxiety while not negatively impacting patient outcomes.
Methods: Patients who underwent biopsy and resection for early-stage lung cancer from October 2021 to August 2024 were identified and grouped based on type of surgical event: SAE vs. standard of care. In the SAE cohort, patients underwent biopsy, rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE), and resection during a single anesthetic encounter. In the standard of care cohort, patients underwent biopsy of a suspicious pulmonary lesion on a separate day from the subsequent surgical resection of the lesion (traditional). Patient characteristics and outcomes were retrospectively analyzed and compared between the two cohorts.
Results: A total of 61 patients (42 traditional, 19 SAE) were included in this study. There were no significant differences in terms of age, gender, preoperative FEV1, preoperative DLCO, and smoking history in pack-years. All but one patient (traditional) had stage 1 disease, though median nodule size was higher in the traditional cohort (2.1 vs 1.5 p=.0342). Adenocarcinoma was the most common histologic type in both cohorts. The median number of days from diagnostic CT to tumor resection was 84.5 days for the traditional patients vs. 48.0 days for the patients that underwent SAE (p<0.0001). The median number of days from the initial consultation with the pulmonologist to tumor resection was 62.5 days for the traditional cohort vs. 38.0 days for the SAE cohort (p=0.0021). Length of stay was 1 day shorter for the SAE cohort (2 vs 3; P=.3511). There were no complications in the SAE cohort, compared to 11 in the traditional cohort. There was no significant difference in cost between the two pathways, but the Net Revenue was higher in the SAE cohort (p=.0348)
Conclusions: When compared to the traditional pathway, the SAE approach to diagnosing and treating lung cancer reduces the TTI compared to the standard of care. In addition, the SAE approach resulted in fewer complications, a shorter length of stay, and increased net revenue. We propose that this more streamlined approach decreases patient anxiety while not negatively impacting patient outcomes.
THORACIC:
Innovations: New devices or novel approaches, preclinical or clinical
Image or Table
