Literature DB >> 1669386

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: cost analysis.

K S Fisher1, E J Reddick, D O Olsen.   

Abstract

Recently laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has become an accepted alternative to the traditional open cholecystectomy (OP). The purpose of this study was to compare laparoscopic cholecystectomy to open cholecystectomy with respect to four variables: (a) operative time, (b) length of hospital stay, (c) total hospital cost, and (d) morbidity and mortality rates. The most recent 200 LCs performed at HCA West Side Hospital were selected for comparison in the study. Demographic data, including age and sex were collected for all patients. The medical record for each patient was then reviewed to obtain the study variables. A control group of 200 patients undergoing elective open cholecystectomy over the same period was selected. Complications occurred in 12 patients (6.0%) in the LC group with one postoperative mortality. Nineteen patients (9.5%) suffered complications in the OC group with no operative mortality. The difference between the two groups was not statistically significant. The average length of operation (recorded in minutes) in the OC group was 87.79 (SD +/- 20.69) as compared to 103.78 (SD +/- 29.01) in the LC group. This difference proved to be slight, but significantly greater (p < 0.0001). The average length of stay (recorded in days) in the OC group was 4.43 (SD +/- 1.29) versus 1.13 (SD +/- .93) in the LC group. Again, the difference proved to be statistically significant (p < 0.0001). The corrected average total hospital charge from OC was $3,006 (SD +/- 755) versus $2,312 (SD +/- 484) for LC, a difference that was statistically significant (p < 0.0001). Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a safe, effective, and cost-efficient alternative to open cholecystectomy.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1669386

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc        ISSN: 1051-7200


  6 in total

Review 1.  Delayed assessment and eager adoption of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: implications for developing surgical technologies.

Authors:  Alexander C Allori; I Michael Leitman; Elizabeth Heitman
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-09-07       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 2.  The E.A.E.S. Consensus Development Conferences on laparoscopic cholecystectomy, appendectomy, and hernia repair. Consensus statements--September 1994. The Educational Committee of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery.

Authors:  E Neugebauer; H Troidl; C K Kum; E Eypasch; M Miserez; A Paul
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Value of robotically assisted surgery for mitral valve disease.

Authors:  Tomislav Mihaljevic; Marijan Koprivanac; Marta Kelava; Avi Goodman; Craig Jarrett; Sarah J Williams; A Marc Gillinov; Gurjyot Bajwa; Stephanie L Mick; Johannes Bonatti; Eugene H Blackstone
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 14.766

4.  Costs of Laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Analysis of potential savings.

Authors:  B M Ure; R Lefering; H Troidl
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Mortality and complications associated with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A meta-analysis.

Authors:  J A Shea; M J Healey; J A Berlin; J R Clarke; P F Malet; R N Staroscik; J S Schwartz; S V Williams
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  Laparoscopic operative technique for adrenal tumors.

Authors:  M Otto; G Szostek; S Nazarewski; T Borkowski; W Chudzinski; T Tolloczko
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2000 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.172

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.