Literature DB >> 22643256

Cost analysis of laparoscopic versus open colectomy in patients with colon cancer: results from a large nationwide population database.

Sachin Vaid1, James Tucker, Ted Bell, Rod Grim, Vanita Ahuja.   

Abstract

Laparoscopic colectomy (LC) is a safe and reliable option for patients with colon cancer. This study examined factors associated with LC use and cost differences between LC and open colectomy (OC). Using the Cost &amp; Utilization Project National Inpatient Sample database (2008), patients with colon cancer undergoing elective LC or OC were selected. Chi square and Mann-Whitney tests were used to assess differences between LC and OC. Logistic and multiple regression analysis was used to determine variables associated with LC and predictors of cost. All analysis was weighted. A total of 63,950 patients were identified (LC 8.1%, OC 91.9%). The majority was female (52.7%), white (61.4%), using Medicare (61.1%), and had surgery performed at a large (64.2%), nonteaching (56.9%), urban (87.3%) hospital in the South (37.7%). Mean age was 70 years. On unadjusted analysis, LC was associated with a lower mortality rate (1.7 vs 2.4%), fewer complications (18.9 vs 27.1%), shorter length of stay (5 vs 7 days), and lower total charges ($41,971 vs $43,459, all P < 0.001). LC is a less expensive but less popular surgical option for colon cancer. Stage, race, Charlson score, teaching status, location, and hospital size influence the use of a laparoscopic approach. LC is associated with fewer complications and decreased mortality which contribute to its lower cost as compared with OC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22643256

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Surg        ISSN: 0003-1348            Impact factor:   0.688


  25 in total

1.  Laparoscopic vs open partial colectomy in elderly patients: Insights from the American College of Surgeons - National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database.

Authors:  Umashankkar Kannan; Vemuru Sunil K Reddy; Amar N Mukerji; Vellore S Parithivel; Ajay K Shah; Brian F Gilchrist; Daniel T Farkas
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-12-07       Impact factor: 5.742

2.  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

3.  Usability of elective laparoscopic sigmoidectomy and feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic surgery for sigmoid volvulus: report of three cases.

Authors:  Masami Ueda; Tadashi Onishi; Taishi Hata; Kentaro Nishida; Takehiro Yanagawa; Shoichiro Fujita; Junya Fujita; Tetsuya Yoshida; Takeshi Tono; Takushi Monden; Shingi Imaoka; Masaki Mori
Journal:  Int Surg       Date:  2015-03

4.  Clinical practice guideline for enhanced recovery after colon and rectal surgery from the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS) and Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES).

Authors:  Joseph C Carmichael; Deborah S Keller; Gabriele Baldini; Liliana Bordeianou; Eric Weiss; Lawrence Lee; Marylise Boutros; James McClane; Scott R Steele; Liane S Feldman
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-08-03       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Impact of operative duration on postoperative pulmonary complications in laparoscopic versus open colectomy.

Authors:  Rachel M Owen; Sebastian D Perez; Nathan Lytle; Ankit Patel; S S Davis; Edward Lin; John F Sweeney
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-04-13       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Is minimally invasive colon resection better than traditional approaches?: First comprehensive national examination with propensity score matching.

Authors:  Yen-Yi Juo; Omar Hyder; Adil H Haider; Melissa Camp; Anne Lidor; Nita Ahuja
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 14.766

Review 7.  What have we learned in minimally invasive colorectal surgery from NSQIP and NIS large databases? A systematic review.

Authors:  Gabriela Batista Rodríguez; Andrea Balla; Santiago Corradetti; Carmen Martinez; Pilar Hernández; Jesús Bollo; Eduard M Targarona
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2018-04-06       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  Assessing the economic advantage of laparoscopic vs. open approaches for colorectal cancer by a propensity score matching analysis.

Authors:  Hiromitsu Hayashi; Nobuyuki Ozaki; Katsuhiro Ogawa; Yoshiaki Ikuta; Hideyuki Tanaka; Kenichi Ogata; Koichi Doi; Hiroshi Takamori
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2017-11-07       Impact factor: 2.549

Review 9.  Robotic versus laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery: towards defining criteria to the right choice.

Authors:  Matthew Zelhart; Andreas M Kaiser
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-08-15       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Systematic review of emergent laparoscopic colorectal surgery for benign and malignant disease.

Authors:  Manish Chand; Muhammed R S Siddiqui; Ashish Gupta; Shahnawaz Rasheed; Paris Tekkis; Amjad Parvaiz; Alex H Mirnezami; Tahseen Qureshi
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-12-07       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.