SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Studies comparing the costs of colorectal resection by laparoscopic (LPS) and open approaches are small sized or not randomized. The main purpose of this study is to compare the hospital costs of LPS and open colorectal surgery in a large series of randomized patients. METHODS: A total of 517 patients with colorectal disease were randomly assigned to LPS (n = 258) or open (n = 259) resection. The following costs were calculated: surgical instruments, operative room (OR) occupation, routine care, postoperative morbidity, and length of hospital stay (LOS). Follow-up for postoperative morbidity was carried out for 30 days after hospital discharge. RESULTS:Operative time was 37 minutes longer in the LPS group. Overall morbidity rate was 18.2% (47 of 258) in the LPS versus 34.7% (90 of 259) in the open group (P = 0.0005). The mean LOS was 9.9 (2.6) days in the LPS group and 12.4 (3.9) days in the open group (P < 0.0001). The additional OR charge in the LPS group was 1171 per patient randomized (864 due to surgical instruments and 307 due to longer time). The saving in the LPS group was 1046 per patient randomized (401 due to shorter LOS and 645 due to the lower cost of postoperative complications). The net balance resulted in 125 extra cost per patient allocated to the LPS group. CONCLUSIONS: The present cost-benefit analysis showed a slight additional cost in the LPS group. The better postoperative short-term outcome in patients receivingLPS had a key role to nearly balance the operative room charges due to laparoscopy.
RCT Entities:
SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Studies comparing the costs of colorectal resection by laparoscopic (LPS) and open approaches are small sized or not randomized. The main purpose of this study is to compare the hospital costs of LPS and open colorectal surgery in a large series of randomized patients. METHODS: A total of 517 patients with colorectal disease were randomly assigned to LPS (n = 258) or open (n = 259) resection. The following costs were calculated: surgical instruments, operative room (OR) occupation, routine care, postoperative morbidity, and length of hospital stay (LOS). Follow-up for postoperative morbidity was carried out for 30 days after hospital discharge. RESULTS: Operative time was 37 minutes longer in the LPS group. Overall morbidity rate was 18.2% (47 of 258) in the LPS versus 34.7% (90 of 259) in the open group (P = 0.0005). The mean LOS was 9.9 (2.6) days in the LPS group and 12.4 (3.9) days in the open group (P < 0.0001). The additional OR charge in the LPS group was 1171 per patient randomized (864 due to surgical instruments and 307 due to longer time). The saving in the LPS group was 1046 per patient randomized (401 due to shorter LOS and 645 due to the lower cost of postoperative complications). The net balance resulted in 125 extra cost per patient allocated to the LPS group. CONCLUSIONS: The present cost-benefit analysis showed a slight additional cost in the LPS group. The better postoperative short-term outcome in patients receiving LPS had a key role to nearly balance the operative room charges due to laparoscopy.
Authors: Hans-Joachim Duepree; Anthony J Senagore; Conor P Delaney; Karen M Brady; Victor W Fazio Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Anthony J Senagore; Hans J Duepree; Conor P Delaney; Sharmilla Dissanaike; Karen M Brady; Victor W Fazio Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Antonio M Lacy; Juan C García-Valdecasas; Salvadora Delgado; Antoni Castells; Pilar Taurá; Josep M Piqué; Josep Visa Journal: Lancet Date: 2002-06-29 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Andrea Vignali; Marco Braga; Walter Zuliani; Matteo Frasson; Giovanni Radaelli; Valerio Di Carlo Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Matteo Frasson; Pablo Granero-Castro; José Luis Ramos Rodríguez; Blas Flor-Lorente; Mariela Braithwaite; Eva Martí Martínez; Jose Antonio Álvarez Pérez; Antonio Codina Cazador; Alejandro Espí; Eduardo Garcia-Granero Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2015-08-28 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: David P Eisenberg; Jane Wey; Philip Q Bao; Melissa Saul; Andrew R Watson; Wolfgang H Schraut; Kenneth K W Lee; A James Moser; Steven J Hughes Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2010-02-21 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Parvinder S Sains; Henry S Tilney; Sanjay Purkayastha; Ara W Darzi; Thanos Athanasiou; Paris P Tekkis; Alexander G Heriot Journal: World J Surg Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Steve Kwon; Richard Billingham; Ellen Farrokhi; Michael Florence; Daniel Herzig; Karen Horvath; Terry Rogers; Scott Steele; Rebecca Symons; Richard Thirlby; Mark Whiteford; David R Flum Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2012-04-24 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Paul J Karanicolas; Shona E Smith; Richard I Inculet; Richard A Malthaner; Richard P Reynolds; Ron Goeree; Amiram Gafni Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2007-05-04 Impact factor: 4.584