Literature DB >> 15557357

Cholecystectomy: costs and health-related quality of life: a comparison of two techniques.

Erik Nilsson1, Axel Ros, Mikael Rahmqvist, Karin Bäckman, Per Carlsson.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Outcomes of previous health economic evaluations comparing minilaparotomy cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy have been inconsistent.
OBJECTIVE: To compare costs for minilaparotomy cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy and to study changes in quality of life induced by these operations.
DESIGN: Single-blind, randomized controlled trial, run from 1 March 1997 to 30 April 1999.
SETTING: One university hospital and four non-university hospitals in Sweden. MAIN MEASURE: : Cost and perceived health estimation according to the global quality of life instrument EuroQol-5D.
RESULTS: Of 1719 cholecystectomy patients at five centres, 724 entered the trial and were treated with minilaparotomy cholecystectomy or laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 362 in each group. Total health care costs were less for minilaparotomy cholecystectomy than for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (median values US$2428 for minilaparotomy cholecystectomy versus US$2613 or US$3006 for laparoscopic cholecystectomy with 100 operations per year and reusable trocars or 50 operations per year and disposable trocars, respectively). There was no significant difference in total costs (including costs due to loss of production) between minilaparotomy cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy with 100 operations per year and reusable trocars in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (US$3731 versus US$3649, respectively). However, in calculations assuming 50 operations per year and disposable trocars in laparoscopic cholecystectomy, this technique was more expensive than minilaparotomy cholecystectomy (US$4042 versus US$3731). Health-related quality of life was slightly but significantly lower for the minilaparotomy cholecystectomy group 1 week after surgery. One month and 1 year postoperatively no difference between the randomized groups was found.
CONCLUSION: Total costs did not differ between minilaparotomy cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy with high-volume surgery and disposable trocars, whereas laparoscopic cholecystectomy was more expensive with fewer operations and disposable trocars. The gain in health-related quality of life with laparoscopic cholecystectomy compared with minilaparotomy cholecystectomy was small and of limited duration.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15557357     DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzh077

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care        ISSN: 1353-4505            Impact factor:   2.038


  20 in total

1.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus mini-laparotomy cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis of randomised control trials.

Authors:  Sanjay Purkayastha; Henry S Tilney; Panagiotis Georgiou; Thanos Athanasiou; Paris P Tekkis; Ara W Darzi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-05-22       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Factors associated with prolonged stay after laparoscopic cholecystectomy in elderly patients.

Authors:  Shih-Ping Cheng; Yuan-Ching Chang; Chien-Liang Liu; Tsen-Long Yang; Kuo-Shyang Jeng; Jie-Jen Lee; Tsang-Pai Liu
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-10-30       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: consensus conference-based guidelines.

Authors:  Ferdinando Agresta; Fabio Cesare Campanile; Nereo Vettoretto; Gianfranco Silecchia; Carlo Bergamini; Pietro Maida; Pietro Lombari; Piero Narilli; Domenico Marchi; Alessandro Carrara; Maria Grazia Esposito; Stefania Fiume; Giuseppe Miranda; Simona Barlera; Marina Davoli
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2015-04-08       Impact factor: 3.445

4.  Cost-minimization analysis in a blind randomized trial on small-incision versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy from a societal perspective: sick leave outweighs efforts in hospital savings.

Authors:  Frederik Keus; Trudy de Jonge; Hein G Gooszen; Erik Buskens; Cornelis J H M van Laarhoven
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2009-09-04       Impact factor: 2.279

5.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy--comparison of early postoperative results in an Australian rural centre and a German university hospital.

Authors:  Matthias W Wichmann; Reinhold Lang; Eben Beukes; Shaukat T Esufali; Karl-Walter Jauch; Tanyia K Hüttl; Thomas P Hüttl
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2009-11-25       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 6.  Open, small-incision, or laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. An overview of Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group reviews.

Authors:  Frederik Keus; Hein G Gooszen; Cornelis Jhm van Laarhoven
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2010-01-20

7.  Staged lavage versus single high-volume lavage in the treatment of feculent/purulent peritonitis: a matched pair analysis.

Authors:  Mohammed R Moussavian; Sven Richter; Otto Kollmar; Jochen Schuld; Martin K Schilling
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2008-12-20       Impact factor: 3.445

8.  Patient-centered outcomes after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Matthew Zapf; Woody Denham; Ermilo Barrera; Zeeshan Butt; JoAnn Carbray; Chih Wang; John Linn; Michael Ujiki
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-08-13       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 9.  A systematic review of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and quality of life reporting in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Prita Daliya; Elizabeth H Gemmill; Dileep N Lobo; Simon L Parsons
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 7.293

10.  Assessing factors influencing return back to work after cholecystectomy: a qualitative research.

Authors:  Frederik Keus; Jolanda de Vries; Hein G Gooszen; Cornelis J H M van Laarhoven
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-01-27       Impact factor: 3.067

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.