Literature DB >> 29417163

[Profit center analysis of esophagectomy : Economical analysis of transthoracic esophagectomy depending on postoperative complications].

C T Baltin1, M Bludau1, F Kron2, T Zander2, M Hallek2, A H Hölscher3, W Schröder4.   

Abstract

Due to increasing medical costs and yet limited financial resources, medical treatment and economic analyses can no longer be separated; therefore, direct costing and cost unit accounting become more and more relevant as controlling tools in hospital management. Transthoracic esophagectomy is an integral part of the current treatment concept in patients with esophageal carcinoma. The question of the present study was whether the present diagnosis-related groups (DRG) system is a cost-effective tool to represent transthoracic esophagectomy. In this retrospective study at a high-volume center, 161 consecutive patients with esophageal carcinoma were included. All patients were surgically treated according to the current S3 guidelines by a transthoracic esophagectomy. Detailed and standardized documentation of the postoperative complications was made according to the classification of Clavien-Dindo and the guidelines of the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG). For each individual patient, the respective actual costs were analyzed according to the Institute for the Remuneration System in Hospitals (InEK) cost accounting approach comparing DRG payments (DRG G03A) on a case level including all extra fees per DRG catalogue. The mean costs per case of all included 161 patients were 24,338 € (median: 19,210 €, range: 12,149-127,376 €), while mean payments per case of 22,591 € were recorded. For the entire study population, the profit margin was -281,330 € (mean: -1747 €). Only patients with an uncomplicated course (Clavien-Dindo 0) yielded a slightly positive profit margin of 2514 €. With increasing complication score the profit margin became increasingly negative (Clavien-Dindo I: -2878 €, Clavien-Dindo IVb: -58,543 €). Within the analysis of the InEK target cost matrix, main cost drivers can be identified as medical services (22.3%) and non-medical infrastructure (18.7%). Surgical treatment according to the existing guidelines of patients with esophageal carcinoma is not cost-covering in high-volume centers and cannot be solely financed by existing DRG revenues.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DRG costs per case; Esophageal cancer; Postoperative complications; Profit center analysis; Transthoracic esophagectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29417163     DOI: 10.1007/s00104-018-0590-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chirurg        ISSN: 0009-4722            Impact factor:   0.955


  11 in total

1.  Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients.

Authors:  James D Luketich; Arjun Pennathur; Omar Awais; Ryan M Levy; Samuel Keeley; Manisha Shende; Neil A Christie; Benny Weksler; Rodney J Landreneau; Ghulam Abbas; Matthew J Schuchert; Katie S Nason
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 12.969

2.  International Consensus on Standardization of Data Collection for Complications Associated With Esophagectomy: Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG).

Authors:  Donald E Low; Derek Alderson; Ivan Cecconello; Andrew C Chang; Gail E Darling; Xavier Benoit DʼJourno; S Michael Griffin; Arnulf H Hölscher; Wayne L Hofstetter; Blair A Jobe; Yuko Kitagawa; John C Kucharczuk; Simon Ying Kit Law; Toni E Lerut; Nick Maynard; Manuel Pera; Jeffrey H Peters; C S Pramesh; John V Reynolds; B Mark Smithers; J Jan B van Lanschot
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  Laparoscopic ischemic conditioning of the stomach for esophageal replacement.

Authors:  Arnulf H Hölscher; Paul M Schneider; Christian Gutschow; Wolfgang Schröder
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  Survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy for resectable oesophageal carcinoma: an updated meta-analysis.

Authors:  Katrin M Sjoquist; Bryan H Burmeister; B Mark Smithers; John R Zalcberg; R John Simes; Andrew Barbour; Val Gebski
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2011-06-16       Impact factor: 41.316

5.  Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Surya S A Y Biere; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Kirsten W Maas; Luigi Bonavina; Camiel Rosman; Josep Roig Garcia; Suzanne S Gisbertz; Jean H G Klinkenbijl; Markus W Hollmann; Elly S M de Lange; H Jaap Bonjer; Donald L van der Peet; Miguel A Cuesta
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2012-05-01       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Evolution of standardized clinical pathways: refining multidisciplinary care and process to improve outcomes of the surgical treatment of esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Sheraz R Markar; Henner Schmidt; Sonia Kunz; Artur Bodnar; Michal Hubka; Donald E Low
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2014-04-29       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 7.  Hospital and surgeon volume in relation to long-term survival after oesophagectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Nele Brusselaers; Fredrik Mattsson; Jesper Lagergren
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2013-11-22       Impact factor: 23.059

8.  Laparoscopic Gastric Mobilization Reduces Postoperative Mortality After Esophageal Cancer Surgery: A French Nationwide Study.

Authors:  Mathieu Messager; Arnaud Pasquer; Alain Duhamel; Gilbert Caranhac; Guillaume Piessen; Christophe Mariette
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 12.969

9.  Assessing DRG cost accounting with respect to resource allocation and tariff calculation: the case of Germany.

Authors:  Matthias Vogl
Journal:  Health Econ Rev       Date:  2012-08-30

10.  Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey.

Authors:  Daniel Dindo; Nicolas Demartines; Pierre-Alain Clavien
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 12.969

View more
  3 in total

1.  Does VO2peak Provide a Prognostic Value in Esophagectomy and Gastrectomy for Post-operative Outcomes?

Authors:  Timo Niels; Christoph T Baltin; Guido Kosanke; Ulrich K Fetzner; Arnulf H Hoelscher; Elfriede Bollschweiler; Jan-Hendrik Naendrup; Freerk T Baumann
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2022 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.406

2.  Prognostic value of inflammatory markers for detecting anastomotic leakage after esophageal resection.

Authors:  Lukas F Liesenfeld; Peter Sauer; Markus K Diener; Ulf Hinz; Thomas Schmidt; Beat P Müller-Stich; Thilo Hackert; Markus W Büchler; Anja Schaible
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2020-12-09       Impact factor: 2.102

3.  Economic Burden of Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy Compared to Alternative Therapy Methods in Patients with Anastomotic Leakage After Esophagectomy.

Authors:  Ann-Kathrin Eichelmann; Sarah Ismail; Jennifer Merten; Patrycja Slepecka; Daniel Palmes; Mike G Laukötter; Andreas Pascher; Wolf Arif Mardin
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2021-02-24       Impact factor: 3.452

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.