Literature DB >> 21685791

Utilization of laparoscopic colectomy in the United States before and after the clinical outcomes of surgical therapy study group trial.

Jennifer D Rea1, Molly M Cone, Brian S Diggs, Karen E Deveney, Kim C Lu, Daniel O Herzig.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the utilization of laparoscopic colectomy (LC) in the United States before and after prospective data supported its use for the treatment of colon cancer.
METHODS: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample 2001-2003 [before Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy (COST)] and 2005-2007 (after COST) was queried for elective colectomies for both benign and malignant disease. The COST trial was published in 2004; therefore, 2004 data were excluded. Univariate analyses including patient-specific, hospital-specific, and outcome variables were performed. Multivariate logistic regression models and subset analyses were used to evaluate these variables and operative approach by time frame.
RESULTS: The query yielded 741,817 elective colectomies (684,969 open and 56,848 laparoscopic). The percentage of elective colectomies performed laparoscopically has increased over time. Laparoscopic colectomy for benign disease increased from 6.2% in 2001-2003 to 11.8% in 2005-2007, while those for colon cancer have increased by a larger percentage, 2.3% to 8.9%. In a multivariate model of patients with colon cancer, the odds ratio (OR) for having a laparoscopic approach after COST was 4.55 (confidence interval 3.81-5.44) compared with before COST. In contrast, for benign disease, the OR was 2.10 (confidence interval 1.79-2.46). Factors predictive of having a laparoscopic approach for cancer have changed very little over time: Patients are more likely to be male, insured, live in areas with the highest incomes, and undergo resection at urban teaching hospitals.
CONCLUSIONS: Within 3 years after publication of the COST trial, the use of laparoscopic resection for colon cancer approached that of benign disease. However, almost 90% of cases are still performed open and utilization remains influenced by socioeconomic factors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21685791     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182251aa3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  34 in total

1.  Effect of surgical approach on 30-day mortality and morbidity after elective colectomy: a NSQIP study.

Authors:  Molly M Cone; Daniel O Herzig; Brian S Diggs; Jennifer D Rea; Karin M Hardiman; Kim C Lu
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2012-03-09       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) for rectal cancer: a training pathway.

Authors:  Elisabeth C McLemore; Christina R Harnsberger; Ryan C Broderick; Hyuma Leland; Patricia Sylla; Alisa M Coker; Hans F Fuchs; Garth R Jacobsen; Bryan Sandler; Vikram Attaluri; Anna T Tsay; Steven D Wexner; Mark A Talamini; Santiago Horgan
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-12-10       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Adoption of laparoscopy for elective colorectal resection: a report from the Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program.

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

4.  Cost savings for elective laparoscopic resection compared with open resection for colorectal cancer in a region of high uptake.

Authors:  Bridie S Thompson; Michael D Coory; Louisa G Gordon; John W Lumley
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-12-14       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Total mesorectal excision for mid and low rectal cancer: Laparoscopic vs robotic surgery.

Authors:  Francesco Feroci; Andrea Vannucchi; Paolo Pietro Bianchi; Stefano Cantafio; Alessia Garzi; Giampaolo Formisano; Marco Scatizzi
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-04-07       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  Surgeon volume and elective resection for colon cancer: an analysis of outcomes and use of laparoscopy.

Authors:  Rachelle N Damle; Christopher W Macomber; Julie M Flahive; Jennifer S Davids; W Brian Sweeney; Paul R Sturrock; Justin A Maykel; Heena P Santry; Karim Alavi
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2014-03-12       Impact factor: 6.113

7.  Robotic approaches may offer benefit in colorectal procedures, more controversial in other areas: a review of 168,248 cases.

Authors:  Maria S Altieri; Jie Yang; Dana A Telem; Jiawen Zhu; Caitlin Halbert; Mark Talamini; Aurora D Pryor
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-07-03       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 8.  Tips, Tricks, and Technique for Laparoscopic Colectomy.

Authors:  Alexandra Briggs; Joel Goldberg
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2017-04

9.  Predicting opportunities to increase utilization of laparoscopy for colon cancer.

Authors:  Deborah S Keller; Niraj Parikh; Anthony J Senagore
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-08-29       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Short-term outcomes of minimally invasive versus open colectomy for colon cancer.

Authors:  Christina M Papageorge; Qianqian Zhao; Eugene F Foley; Bruce A Harms; Charles P Heise; Evie H Carchman; Gregory D Kennedy
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2016-04-22       Impact factor: 2.192

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.