Literature DB >> 24931314

Cost comparison analysis of open versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.

Daniel R Rutz1, Malcolm H Squires, Shishir K Maithel, Juan M Sarmiento, Joanna W Etra, Sebastian D Perez, William Knechtle, Kenneth Cardona, Maria C Russell, Charles A Staley, John F Sweeney, David A Kooby.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In comparison with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP), laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is associated with fewer complications and shorter hospital stays, but comparative cost data for the two approaches are limited.
METHODS: Records of all distal pancreatectomies carried out from January 2009 to June 2013 were reviewed and stratified according to operative complexity. Patient factors and outcomes were recorded. Total variable costs (TVCs) were tabulated for each patient, and stratified by category [e.g. 'floor', 'operating room' (OR), 'radiology']. Costs for index admissions and 30-day readmissions were compared between LDP and ODP groups.
RESULTS: Of 153 procedures, 115 (70 LDP, 45 ODP) were selected for analysis. The TVC of the index admission was US$3420 less per patient in the LDP group (US$10 480 versus US$13 900; P = 0.06). Although OR costs were significantly greater in the LDP cohort (US$5756 versus US$4900; P = 0.02), the shorter average hospitalization in the LDP group (5.2 days versus 7.7 days; P = 0.01) resulted in a lower overall cost. The total cost of index hospitalization combined with readmission was significantly lower in the LDP cohort (US$11 106 versus US$14 803; P = 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: In appropriately selected patients, LDP is more cost-effective than ODP. The increased OR cost associated with LDP is offset by the shorter hospitalization. These data clarify targets for further cost reductions.
© 2014 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24931314      PMCID: PMC4238857          DOI: 10.1111/hpb.12288

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  HPB (Oxford)        ISSN: 1365-182X            Impact factor:   3.647


  27 in total

1.  Proposed classification of complications of surgery with examples of utility in cholecystectomy.

Authors:  P A Clavien; J R Sanabria; S M Strasberg
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 3.982

Review 2.  Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition.

Authors:  Claudio Bassi; Christos Dervenis; Giovanni Butturini; Abe Fingerhut; Charles Yeo; Jakob Izbicki; John Neoptolemos; Michael Sarr; William Traverso; Marcus Buchler
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 3.982

3.  Clinical outcomes compared between laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy.

Authors:  B W Eom; J-Y Jang; S E Lee; H-S Han; Y-S Yoon; S-W Kim
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-11-20       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Left-sided pancreatectomy: a multicenter comparison of laparoscopic and open approaches.

Authors:  David A Kooby; Theresa Gillespie; David Bentrem; Attila Nakeeb; Max C Schmidt; Nipun B Merchant; Alex A Parikh; Robert C G Martin; Charles R Scoggins; Syed Ahmad; Hong Jin Kim; Jaemin Park; Fabian Johnston; Matthew J Strouch; Alex Menze; Jennifer Rymer; Rebecca McClaine; Steven M Strasberg; Mark S Talamonti; Charles A Staley; Kelly M McMasters; Andrew M Lowy; Johnita Byrd-Sellers; William C Wood; William G Hawkins
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 5.  Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and pancreatoduodenectomy: is it worthwhile? A meta-analysis of laparoscopic pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Masafumi Nakamura; Hiroshi Nakashima
Journal:  J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 7.027

6.  Laparoscopic versus open gastric bypass: a randomized study of outcomes, quality of life, and costs.

Authors:  N T Nguyen; C Goldman; C J Rosenquist; A Arango; C J Cole; S J Lee; B M Wolfe
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Comparative analysis of clinical outcomes for laparoscopic distal pancreatic resection and open distal pancreatic resection at a single institution.

Authors:  Song C Kim; Kwan T Park; Ji W Hwang; Hyeng C Shin; Sang S Lee; Dong W Seo; Sung K Lee; Myung H Kim; Duck J Han
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-06-05       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 8.  Laparoscopic pancreatic resection for cancer.

Authors:  David A Kooby
Journal:  Expert Rev Anticancer Ther       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 4.512

Review 9.  Laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy: cost comparison with analysis of individual parameters.

Authors:  Sangtae Park; Margaret S Pearle; Jeffrey A Cadeddu; Yair Lotan
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 2.942

10.  Erich Mühe and the rejection of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (1985): a surgeon ahead of his time.

Authors:  G S Litynski
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  1998 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.172

View more
  16 in total

Review 1.  Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery for benign and malignant disease.

Authors:  Thijs de Rooij; Sjors Klompmaker; Mohammad Abu Hilal; Michael L Kendrick; Olivier R Busch; Marc G Besselink
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2016-02-17       Impact factor: 46.802

2.  The First Decade of Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy in the United States: Costs and Outcomes Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample.

Authors:  Thuy B Tran; Monica M Dua; David J Worhunsky; George A Poultsides; Jeffrey A Norton; Brendan C Visser
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-08-15       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Pan-European survey on the implementation of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery with emphasis on cancer.

Authors:  Thijs de Rooij; Marc G Besselink; Awad Shamali; Giovanni Butturini; Olivier R Busch; Bjørn Edwin; Roberto Troisi; Laureano Fernández-Cruz; Ibrahim Dagher; Claudio Bassi; Mohammad Abu Hilal
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2015-12-10       Impact factor: 3.647

4.  Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy-a propensity score-matched analysis from the German StuDoQ|Pancreas registry.

Authors:  Ulrich Friedrich Wellner; Hryhoriy Lapshyn; Detlef K Bartsch; Ioannis Mintziras; Ulrich Theodor Hopt; Uwe Wittel; Hans-Jörg Krämling; Hubert Preissinger-Heinzel; Matthias Anthuber; Bernd Geissler; Jörg Köninger; Katharina Feilhauer; Merten Hommann; Luisa Peter; Natascha C Nüssler; Thomas Klier; Ulrich Mansmann; Tobias Keck
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2016-11-04       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 5.  Attempts to prevent postoperative pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Yoshihiro Miyasaka; Yasuhisa Mori; Kohei Nakata; Takao Ohtsuka; Masafumi Nakamura
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2016-06-20       Impact factor: 2.549

Review 6.  Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Bulent Salman; Tonguc Utku Yilmaz; Kursat Dikmen; Mehmet Kaplan
Journal:  J Vis Surg       Date:  2016-08-12

7.  Robotics in HPB surgery.

Authors:  Thomas Hanna; Charles Imber
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 1.891

8.  The laparoscopic approach to distal pancreatectomy is a value-added proposition for patients undergoing care in moderate-volume and high-volume centers.

Authors:  Emanuel Eguia; Paul C Kuo; Patrick Sweigert; Marc Nelson; Gerard V Aranha; Gerard Abood; Constantine V Godellas; Marshall S Baker
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2019-05-31       Impact factor: 3.982

9.  Laparoscopic left pancreatectomy: early results after 115 consecutive patients.

Authors:  Santiago Sánchez-Cabús; Jean-Philippe Adam; Gabriella Pittau; Maximiliano Gelli; Antonio Sa Cunha
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-02-19       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 10.  Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy - The first meta-analysis.

Authors:  Paschalis Gavriilidis; Chetana Lim; Benjamin Menahem; Eylon Lahat; Chady Salloum; Daniel Azoulay
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2016-05-20       Impact factor: 3.647

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.