Russell C Langan1, Chaoyi Zheng1, Katherine Harris2, Richard Verstraete3, Waddah B Al-Refaie4, Lynt B Johnson5. 1. Department of Surgery, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC; MedStar-Georgetown Surgical Outcomes Research Center, Washington, DC. 2. Department of Surgery, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC; MedStar-Georgetown Surgical Outcomes Research Center, Washington, DC; MedStar Health Research Institute, Washington, DC. 3. Department of Surgery, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC. 4. Department of Surgery, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC; MedStar-Georgetown Surgical Outcomes Research Center, Washington, DC; Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC. 5. Department of Surgery, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC; MedStar-Georgetown Surgical Outcomes Research Center, Washington, DC; Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC. Electronic address: JOHNSOL3@gunet.georgetown.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Owing to limited data on hospital resources consumed in caring for the oldest-old, we examined the use of pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD)-relevant hospital resources in patients of increasing age treated in high-volume hospitals participating in the University HealthSystem Consortium. METHODS: Perioperative outcomes, resource use, and direct costs were compared across increasing age groups in 12,766 PDs (<70 years, n = 8,564; 70-79 years, n = 3,302; ≥80 years, n = 900) performed in 79 high-volume hospitals between 2010 and 2014. Linear regression models with and without covariate adjustments were used to assess the impact of older age. RESULTS: The oldest-old experienced fewer readmissions and had equivalent intensive care unit use and mortality rates compared with both younger cohorts. However, those ≥80 years experienced more complications, blood transfusions, greater total parenteral nutrition (TPN) use, longer duration of stay, and higher direct hospital costs compared with those <70 years No differences were found between patients ≥80 years and those 70-79 years with respect to the administration of blood products, TPN, or the direct cost of PD. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest the ability to deliver quality pancreatic surgical care to an aging population without strong associations to increased resource utilization. As the number of octogenarians undergoing PD continues to grow, the impact of this technically complex procedure on other important cancer care metrics, including patient-reported outcomes and quality of life, requires further assessment.
INTRODUCTION: Owing to limited data on hospital resources consumed in caring for the oldest-old, we examined the use of pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD)-relevant hospital resources in patients of increasing age treated in high-volume hospitals participating in the University HealthSystem Consortium. METHODS: Perioperative outcomes, resource use, and direct costs were compared across increasing age groups in 12,766 PDs (<70 years, n = 8,564; 70-79 years, n = 3,302; ≥80 years, n = 900) performed in 79 high-volume hospitals between 2010 and 2014. Linear regression models with and without covariate adjustments were used to assess the impact of older age. RESULTS: The oldest-old experienced fewer readmissions and had equivalent intensive care unit use and mortality rates compared with both younger cohorts. However, those ≥80 years experienced more complications, blood transfusions, greater total parenteral nutrition (TPN) use, longer duration of stay, and higher direct hospital costs compared with those <70 years No differences were found between patients ≥80 years and those 70-79 years with respect to the administration of blood products, TPN, or the direct cost of PD. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest the ability to deliver quality pancreatic surgical care to an aging population without strong associations to increased resource utilization. As the number of octogenarians undergoing PD continues to grow, the impact of this technically complex procedure on other important cancer care metrics, including patient-reported outcomes and quality of life, requires further assessment.
Authors: Adrian M Fox; Kristen Pitzul; Faizal Bhojani; Max Kaplan; Carol-Anne Moulton; Alice C Wei; Ian McGilvray; Sean Cleary; Allan Okrainec Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2011-12-17 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Jeannine Bachmann; Christoph W Michalski; Marc E Martignoni; Markus W Büchler; Helmut Friess Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2006 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Eugene P Kennedy; Ernest L Rosato; Patricia K Sauter; Laura M Rosenberg; Cataldo Doria; Ignazio R Marino; Karen A Chojnacki; Adam C Berger; Charles J Yeo Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Bellal Joseph; John M Morton; Tina Hernandez-Boussard; Ilan Rubinfeld; Chadi Faraj; Vic Velanovich Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: G A Porter; P W Pisters; C Mansyur; A Bisanz; K Reyna; P Stanford; J E Lee; D B Evans Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2000-08 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Taylor S Riall; John L Cameron; Keith D Lillemoe; Jordan M Winter; Kurtis A Campbell; Ralph H Hruban; David Chang; Charles J Yeo Journal: Surgery Date: 2006-08-28 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Fabian Gerstenhaber; Julie Grossman; Nir Lubezky; Eran Itzkowitz; Ido Nachmany; Ronen Sever; Menahem Ben-Haim; Richard Nakache; Joseph M Klausner; Guy Lahat Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2013-07-18 Impact factor: 5.562