Jing Hu1, Zhenzhou He1. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University 2000 Jiangyue Road, Shanghai 201112, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recently, the economic cost of anesthesiahas attracted attention. To compare the costs of three methods of general anesthesia (GA), a retrospective 1-year study was designed for patients undergoing radical resection for gastric carcinoma. METHODS: A total of 398 patients were originally included in the study. Subjects were divided into three groups according to the mode of anesthesia: balanced anesthesia (BAL; n=258), total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA; n=36), and inhalational anesthesia (INH; n=104). RESULTS: When patients were undergoing elective radical resection for gastric carcinoma, the duration of anesthesia, age, duration of surgery, and postoperative analgesia were positively correlated with the total cost of anesthesia (including wastage of propofol 200 mg:20 mL). Duration of anesthesia and postoperative analgesia were positively correlated with the total cost of anesthesia (including wastage of propofol 500 mg:50 mL). However, the anesthesia group was negatively correlated with the total cost of anesthesia (including drug wastage). When propofol 500 mg:50 mL was used, the total cost of anesthesia and total cost of anesthesia per hour in the BAL group was higher than in the INH group. However, when excluding drug wastage (propofol 200 mg:20 mL), the BAL group was more expensive than the other two groups. CONCLUSION: Use of propofol 200 mg:20 mL as a GA would save money.
BACKGROUND: Recently, the economic cost of anesthesiahas attracted attention. To compare the costs of three methods of general anesthesia (GA), a retrospective 1-year study was designed for patients undergoing radical resection for gastric carcinoma. METHODS: A total of 398 patients were originally included in the study. Subjects were divided into three groups according to the mode of anesthesia: balanced anesthesia (BAL; n=258), total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA; n=36), and inhalational anesthesia (INH; n=104). RESULTS: When patients were undergoing elective radical resection for gastric carcinoma, the duration of anesthesia, age, duration of surgery, and postoperative analgesia were positively correlated with the total cost of anesthesia (including wastage of propofol 200 mg:20 mL). Duration of anesthesia and postoperative analgesia were positively correlated with the total cost of anesthesia (including wastage of propofol 500 mg:50 mL). However, the anesthesia group was negatively correlated with the total cost of anesthesia (including drug wastage). When propofol 500 mg:50 mL was used, the total cost of anesthesia and total cost of anesthesia per hour in the BAL group was higher than in the INH group. However, when excluding drug wastage (propofol 200 mg:20 mL), the BAL group was more expensive than the other two groups. CONCLUSION: Use of propofol 200 mg:20 mL as a GA would save money.
Entities:
Keywords:
Gastric cancer; cost-minimization analysis; general anesthesia; propofol; radical resection of gastric cancer