Sahil Gambhir1, Shaun Daly1, Shelley Maithel1, Brian M Sheehan1, James Nguyen1, Marcelo W Hinojosa1, Brian R Smith1, Ninh T Nguyen2,3. 1. Department of Surgery, University of California Irvine Medical Center, Orange, CA, 92868, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, University of California Irvine Medical Center, Orange, CA, 92868, USA. ninhn@uci.edu. 3. Department of Surgery, University of California Irvine Medical Center, 333 City Blvd West, Suite 1600, Orange, CA, 92868, USA. ninhn@uci.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hiatal Hernia Repairs (HHR) are performed by both general surgeons (GS) and thoracic surgeons (TS). However, there are limited literature with respect to outcomes of HHR based on specialty training. The objective of this study was to compare the utilization, perioperative outcomes, and cost for HHR performed by GS versus TS. METHODS: The Vizient database was used to identify patients who underwent elective laparoscopic HHR between October 2014 and June 2018. Patients were grouped according to surgeon's specialty (GS vs. TS). Patient demographics and outcomes including in-hospital mortality were compared between groups. RESULTS: During the study period 13,764 patients underwent HHR by either GS or TS. GS performed 9930 (72%) cases while TS performed 3834 (28%) cases. There was no significant difference between GS versus TS with regard to serious morbidity (1.28% vs. 1.30%, p = 0.97) or mortality (0.10% vs. 0.21%, p = 0.19). The mortality index was 0.24 for GS versus 0.45 for TS. Compared to TS, laparoscopic HHR performed by GS was associated with a shorter LOS (2.57 days vs. 2.72 days, p < 0.001) and lower mean hospital costs ($7139 vs. $8032, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Within the context of academic centers, laparoscopic HHRs are mostly performed by GS with comparable outcome between general versus thoracic surgeons.
BACKGROUND:Hiatal Hernia Repairs (HHR) are performed by both general surgeons (GS) and thoracic surgeons (TS). However, there are limited literature with respect to outcomes of HHR based on specialty training. The objective of this study was to compare the utilization, perioperative outcomes, and cost for HHR performed by GS versus TS. METHODS: The Vizient database was used to identify patients who underwent elective laparoscopic HHR between October 2014 and June 2018. Patients were grouped according to surgeon's specialty (GS vs. TS). Patient demographics and outcomes including in-hospital mortality were compared between groups. RESULTS: During the study period 13,764 patients underwent HHR by either GS or TS. GS performed 9930 (72%) cases while TS performed 3834 (28%) cases. There was no significant difference between GS versus TS with regard to serious morbidity (1.28% vs. 1.30%, p = 0.97) or mortality (0.10% vs. 0.21%, p = 0.19). The mortality index was 0.24 for GS versus 0.45 for TS. Compared to TS, laparoscopic HHR performed by GS was associated with a shorter LOS (2.57 days vs. 2.72 days, p < 0.001) and lower mean hospital costs ($7139 vs. $8032, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Within the context of academic centers, laparoscopic HHRs are mostly performed by GS with comparable outcome between general versus thoracic surgeons.
Authors: Benedetto Mungo; Daniela Molena; Miloslawa Stem; Richard L Feinberg; Anne O Lidor Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2014-04-13 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Bryan A Lieber; Jensen K Henry; Nitin Agarwal; John D Day; Thomas W Morris; Marcus L Stephens; Adib A Abla Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Michael Latzko; Frank Borao; Anthony Squillaro; Jonas Mansson; William Barker; Thomas Baker Journal: JSLS Date: 2014 Jul-Sep Impact factor: 2.172