Literature DB >> 30558876

The cost burden of clinically significant esophageal anastomotic leaks-a steep price to pay.

John Agzarian1, Sue L Visscher2, Ariel W Knight3, Mark S Allen3, Stephen D Cassivi3, Francis C Nichols3, K Robert Shen3, Dennis Wigle3, Shanda H Blackmon3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate resource consumption of clinically significant esophageal anastomotic leaks.
METHODS: Between September 1, 2008, to December 31, 2014, a prospectively maintained database was queried to identify patients with grade III to IV anastomotic leaks after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Inflation-adjusted standardized costs were applied to billed services related to leak diagnosis and treatment, from time of leak detection to resumption of oral diet. A matched analysis was used to compare average expenditures in patients without vs. those with an anastomotic leak.
RESULTS: Of 448 patients undergoing esophagectomy after neoadjuvant treatment, 399 patients met inclusion criteria. Twenty-four grade III to IV anastomotic leaks were identified (6% leak rate). Five transhiatal esophagectomies accounted for 20.8% of cases, whereas 9 Ivor Lewis and 10 McKeown esophagectomies accounted for 37.5% and 41.7%, respectively. The median time required to treat an anastomotic leak was 73 days (range 14-701). The additional median standardized cost per leak was $68,296 (mean $119,822). Matched analysis demonstrated that mean treatment costs were 2.6 times greater for patients with an anastomotic leak. This was primarily attributed to prolonged hospitalization, with post-leak detection length of stay ranging from 7 to 73 days. The largest contributors to cost for all patients were intensive care stay (30%), hospital room (17%), pharmacy (16%), and surgical intervention (13%).
CONCLUSIONS: Grade III to IV esophageal anastomotic leaks more than double the cost of an esophagectomy and have a significant cost burden. Focus should be placed on preventative measures to avoid leaks at the time of the index operation.
Copyright © 2018 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  anastomotic leak; cost; esophagectomy; resources

Year:  2018        PMID: 30558876     DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2018.10.137

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg        ISSN: 0022-5223            Impact factor:   5.209


  5 in total

1.  Assessment of Routine Esophagram for Detecting Anastomotic Leak After Esophagectomy.

Authors:  Kelly R Haisley; Missy L DeSouza; Elizabeth N Dewey; Sabrina E Drexel; Yalini Vigneswaran; John G Hunter; James P Dolan
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2019-09-01       Impact factor: 14.766

2.  Routine Radiologic Assessment for Anastomotic Leak Is Not Necessary in Asymptomatic Patients After Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer.

Authors:  Hansol Kang; Kfir Ben-David; George A Sarosi; Ryan M Thomas
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2022-01-17       Impact factor: 3.452

3.  Factors associated with the costs of hospitalization after esophagectomy: a retrospective observational study at a three-tertiary cancer hospital in China.

Authors:  Qi Liu; Yong-Kui Yu; Deng-Yun Wang; Wen-Qun Xing
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 2.895

4.  The Effects of Anastomotic Leaks on the Net Revenue from Colon Surgery.

Authors:  Bassey Enodien; Andreas Maurer; Vincent Ochs; Marta Bachmann; Maike Gripp; Daniel M Frey; Anas Taha
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-08-01       Impact factor: 4.614

5.  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

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.