Literature DB >> 12632125

Assessing the costs and consequences of laparoscopic vs. open methods of groin hernia repair: a systematic review.

L Vale1, A Ludbrook, A Grant.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We aimed to provide unbiased estimates of cost-effectiveness by systematically reviewing published cost and cost-effectiveness data derived from studies with rigorous designs that compared laparoscopic with open groin hernia repair.
METHODS: Studies reporting costs and outcomes were identified as part of a systematic review of randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic with open repair. The quality of the included studies was assessed against a standard checklist. Cost per recurrence avoided and cost per additional day at usual activities were estimated.
RESULTS: Fourteen studies were identified. Laparoscopic repair was less efficient than open mesh repair in terms of avoiding recurrences, avoided but it had a modest cost per additional day back at usual activities. Laparoscopic repair is more likely to be efficient when compared with open nonmesh repair.
CONCLUSION: The type of open repair with which laparoscopic repair is compared influences its cost-effectiveness. The earlier return to usual activities provided by laparoscopic repair may make it worthwhile in some circumstances.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12632125     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-002-9175-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  7 in total

1.  Do guidelines influence results in inguinal hernia treatment? A descriptive study of 2,535 hernia repairs in one teaching hospital from 1994 to 2004.

Authors:  T J Aufenacker; S P Schmits; D J Gouma; M P Simons
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2008-08-06       Impact factor: 4.739

2.  EAES Consensus Development Conference on endoscopic repair of groin hernias.

Authors:  M M Poelman; B van den Heuvel; J D Deelder; G S A Abis; N Beudeker; R R Bittner; G Campanelli; D van Dam; B J Dwars; H H Eker; A Fingerhut; I Khatkov; F Koeckerling; J F Kukleta; M Miserez; A Montgomery; R M Munoz Brands; S Morales Conde; F E Muysoms; M Soltes; W Tromp; Y Yavuz; H J Bonjer
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-05-25       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Comparison of the open tension-free mesh-plug, transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP), and totally extraperitoneal (TEP) laparoscopic techniques for primary unilateral inguinal hernia repair: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Ke Gong; Nengwei Zhang; Yiping Lu; Bin Zhu; Zhanzhi Zhang; Dexiao Du; Xia Zhao; Haijun Jiang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-06-15       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Comparison of endoscopic procedures vs Lichtenstein and other open mesh techniques for inguinal hernia repair: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  C G Schmedt; S Sauerland; R Bittner
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-12-02       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  European Hernia Society guidelines on the treatment of inguinal hernia in adult patients.

Authors:  M P Simons; T Aufenacker; M Bay-Nielsen; J L Bouillot; G Campanelli; J Conze; D de Lange; R Fortelny; T Heikkinen; A Kingsnorth; J Kukleta; S Morales-Conde; P Nordin; V Schumpelick; S Smedberg; M Smietanski; G Weber; M Miserez
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2009-07-28       Impact factor: 4.739

6.  Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in the Armed Forces: A 5-year single centre study.

Authors:  C K Jakhmola; Ameet Kumar
Journal:  Med J Armed Forces India       Date:  2015-07-22

Review 7.  The role of endoscopic extraperitoneal herniorrhaphy: where do we stand in 2005?

Authors:  W B Bowne; C B Morgenthal; A E Castro; P Shah; G S Ferzli
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-02-06       Impact factor: 3.453

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.