Victor Okunrintemi1, Faiz Gani1, Timothy M Pawlik2. 1. Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, The Urban Meyer III and Shelley Meyer Chair for Cancer Research, Wexner Medical Center at The Ohio State University, 395 W. 12th Avenue, Suite 670, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA. tim.pawlik@osumc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been associated with improved postoperative clinical outcomes, the widespread use of MIS by procedure and hospital has been limited. We sought to report on national trends postoperative clinical outcomes for minimally invasive liver and pancreatic surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing an elective liver or pancreatic resection were identified using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample between 2002 and 2012. Multivariable regression analysis was used to compare postoperative outcomes, and total hospital costs between patients who underwent a MIS versus an open resection over the study time period. RESULTS: A total of 47,685 patients were identified; 21,280 (44.6 %) patients underwent a hepatic resection while 26,405(55.4 %) patients underwent a pancreatic resection. MIS was performed in 2674 (5.6 %) patients and increased from 2.6 % in 2002 to 9.6 % in 2012 (p < 0.001); this trend was observed for both pancreatic and liver resections (both p < 0.001). Over the study time period, use of MIS was consistently associated with improved postoperative outcomes including decreased postoperative morbidity (open vs. MIS: 32.9 vs. 29.6 %) and a shorter length-of-stay (≤4 days; MIS, 21.4 %; Open, 13.7 %; both p < 0.05). The median costs associated with MIS decreased over time compared with the open surgical approach and were on average $572 lower than the cost associated with open surgery. CONCLUSION: Compared to open resection, MIS was associated with lower postoperative morbidity, a shorter length-of-stay, and lower cost. The use of MIS should be encouraged in order to improve postoperative outcomes and decrease healthcare spending via value enhancement.
BACKGROUND: Although minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been associated with improved postoperative clinical outcomes, the widespread use of MIS by procedure and hospital has been limited. We sought to report on national trends postoperative clinical outcomes for minimally invasive liver and pancreatic surgery. METHODS:Patients undergoing an elective liver or pancreatic resection were identified using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample between 2002 and 2012. Multivariable regression analysis was used to compare postoperative outcomes, and total hospital costs between patients who underwent a MIS versus an open resection over the study time period. RESULTS: A total of 47,685 patients were identified; 21,280 (44.6 %) patients underwent a hepatic resection while 26,405(55.4 %) patients underwent a pancreatic resection. MIS was performed in 2674 (5.6 %) patients and increased from 2.6 % in 2002 to 9.6 % in 2012 (p < 0.001); this trend was observed for both pancreatic and liver resections (both p < 0.001). Over the study time period, use of MIS was consistently associated with improved postoperative outcomes including decreased postoperative morbidity (open vs. MIS: 32.9 vs. 29.6 %) and a shorter length-of-stay (≤4 days; MIS, 21.4 %; Open, 13.7 %; both p < 0.05). The median costs associated with MIS decreased over time compared with the open surgical approach and were on average $572 lower than the cost associated with open surgery. CONCLUSION: Compared to open resection, MIS was associated with lower postoperative morbidity, a shorter length-of-stay, and lower cost. The use of MIS should be encouraged in order to improve postoperative outcomes and decrease healthcare spending via value enhancement.
Authors: Raghunandan Venkat; Barish H Edil; Richard D Schulick; Anne O Lidor; Martin A Makary; Christopher L Wolfgang Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Giuseppe R Nigri; Alan S Rosman; Niccolò Petrucciani; Alessandro Fancellu; Michele Pisano; Luigi Zorcolo; Giovanni Ramacciato; Marcovalerio Melis Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2010-12-24 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Andrew C McCoy; Enej Gasevic; Randolph E Szlabick; Abe E Sahmoun; Robert P Sticca Journal: J Surg Educ Date: 2013 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.891
Authors: Tsafrir Vanounou; Jennifer L Steel; Kevin Tri Nguyen; Allan Tsung; J Wallis Marsh; David A Geller; T Clark Gamblin Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2009-12-22 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Michael J Hughes; Rosie J Hackney; Peter J Lamb; Stephen J Wigmore; D A Christopher Deans; Richard J E Skipworth Journal: World J Surg Date: 2019-07 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Ioannis A Ziogas; Alexandros P Evangeliou; Konstantinos S Mylonas; Dimitrios I Athanasiadis; Panagiotis Cherouveim; David A Geller; Richard D Schulick; Sophoclis P Alexopoulos; Georgios Tsoulfas Journal: Eur J Health Econ Date: 2021-03-19
Authors: Faiz Gani; Fabian M Johnston; Howard Nelson-Williams; Marcelo Cerullo; Mary E Dillhoff; Carl R Schmidt; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2017-06-29 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Demetrios Moris; Amir A Rahnemai-Azar; Diamantis I Tsilimigras; Ioannis Ntanasis-Stathopoulos; Hugo P Marques; Eleftherios Spartalis; Evangelos Felekouras; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2017-11-03 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Lu Wu; Diamantis I Tsilimigras; Katiuscha Merath; J Madison Hyer; Anghela Z Paredes; Rittal Mehta; Kota Sahara; Fabio Bagante; Eliza W Beal; Feng Shen; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2019-04-22 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Marcelo Cerullo; Sophia Y Chen; Mary Dillhoff; Carl Schmidt; Joseph K Canner; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2017-09-20 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: L C Franken; M J van der Poel; A E J Latenstein; M J Zwart; E Roos; O R Busch; M G Besselink; T M van Gulik Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2019-05-02