L Goense1, W A van Dijk2, J A Govaert3, P S N van Rossum4, J P Ruurda5, R van Hillegersberg6. 1. Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: L.Goense-2@umcutrecht.nl. 2. X-IS, Delft, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: R.vanHillegersberg@umcutrecht.nl.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to estimate the economic burden of postoperative complications after esophagectomy for cancer, in order to optimally allocate resources for quality improvement initiatives in the future. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected clinical and financial outcomes after esophageal cancer surgery in a tertiary referral center in the Netherlands was performed. Data was extracted from consecutive patients registered in the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit between 2011 and 2014 (n = 201). Costs were measured up to 90-days after hospital discharge and based on Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing. The additional costs were estimated using multiple linear regression models. RESULTS: The average total cost for one patient after esophagectomy was €37,581 (±31,372). The estimated costs of an esophagectomy without complications were €23,476 (±6496). Mean costs after minor (47%) and severe complications (29%) were €31,529 (±23,359) and €59,167 (±42,615) (p < 0.001), respectively. The 5% most expensive patients were responsible for 20.3% of the total hospital costs assessed in this study. Patient characteristics associated with additional costs in multivariable analysis included, age >70 (+€2,922, p = 0.036), female gender (+€4,357, p = 0.005), COPD (+€5,415, p = 0.002), and a history of thromboembolic events (+€6,213, p = 0.028). Complications associated with a significant increase in costs in multivariable analysis included anastomotic leakage (+€4,123, p = 0.008), cardiac complications (+€5,711, p = 0.003), chyle leakage (+€6,188, p < 0.001) and postoperative bleeding (+€31,567, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Complications and severity of complications after esophageal surgery are associated with a substantial increase in costs. Although not all postoperative complications can be prevented, implementation of preventive measures to reduce complications could result in a considerable cost reduction and quality improvement.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to estimate the economic burden of postoperative complications after esophagectomy for cancer, in order to optimally allocate resources for quality improvement initiatives in the future. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected clinical and financial outcomes after esophageal cancer surgery in a tertiary referral center in the Netherlands was performed. Data was extracted from consecutive patients registered in the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit between 2011 and 2014 (n = 201). Costs were measured up to 90-days after hospital discharge and based on Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing. The additional costs were estimated using multiple linear regression models. RESULTS: The average total cost for one patient after esophagectomy was €37,581 (±31,372). The estimated costs of an esophagectomy without complications were €23,476 (±6496). Mean costs after minor (47%) and severe complications (29%) were €31,529 (±23,359) and €59,167 (±42,615) (p < 0.001), respectively. The 5% most expensive patients were responsible for 20.3% of the total hospital costs assessed in this study. Patient characteristics associated with additional costs in multivariable analysis included, age >70 (+€2,922, p = 0.036), female gender (+€4,357, p = 0.005), COPD (+€5,415, p = 0.002), and a history of thromboembolic events (+€6,213, p = 0.028). Complications associated with a significant increase in costs in multivariable analysis included anastomotic leakage (+€4,123, p = 0.008), cardiac complications (+€5,711, p = 0.003), chyle leakage (+€6,188, p < 0.001) and postoperative bleeding (+€31,567, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Complications and severity of complications after esophageal surgery are associated with a substantial increase in costs. Although not all postoperative complications can be prevented, implementation of preventive measures to reduce complications could result in a considerable cost reduction and quality improvement.
Authors: Sivesh K Kamarajah; James Bundred; Gary Spence; Andrew Kennedy; Bobby V M Dasari; Ewen A Griffiths Journal: World J Surg Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: R B den Boer; C de Jongh; W T E Huijbers; T J M Jaspers; J P W Pluim; R van Hillegersberg; M Van Eijnatten; J P Ruurda Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2022-08-04 Impact factor: 3.453
Authors: E M de Groot; G M Kuiper; A van der Veen; L Fourie; L Goense; S van der Horst; J W van den Berg; R van Hillegersberg; J P Ruurda Journal: Updates Surg Date: 2022-08-17
Authors: E M de Groot; L Goense; B F Kingma; J W van den Berg; J P Ruurda; R van Hillegersberg Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2022-10-06 Impact factor: 3.453
Authors: Hla-Hla Thein; Nathaniel Jembere; Kednapa Thavorn; Kelvin K W Chan; Peter C Coyte; Claire de Oliveira; Chin Hur; Craig C Earle Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2018-06-27 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Angela C Tramontano; Yufan Chen; Tina R Watson; Andrew Eckel; Chin Hur; Chung Yin Kong Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2019-07-26 Impact factor: 4.452
Authors: Juliëtte J C M van Munster; Joost J G Wammes; Rolf H Bremmer; Amir H Zamanipoor Najafabadi; Raphael J Hemler; Wilco C Peul; Wilbert B van den Hout; Peter Paul G van Benthem Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 2.692