Literature DB >> 8480883

Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus open cholecystectomy.

E B Bass1, H A Pitt, K D Lillemoe.   

Abstract

To assess the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus open cholecystectomy from the payer's perspective, we estimated the probabilities of potential outcomes of each procedure, associated quality-of-life effects, and related direct medical charges and incorporated these estimates into a computerized simulation model. The model projects that laparoscopic cholecystectomy will be more effective than open surgery in terms of total mortality and quality-adjusted survival, for both sexes and all ages. Projected 5-year cumulative charges are lower for laparoscopic cholecystectomy than for open cholecystectomy ($5,354 versus $5,525 for 45-year-old women; $6,036 versus $6,830 for 45-year-old men), and the differences increase substantially with increasing age. We concluded that laparoscopic cholecystectomy is likely to be less costly and more effective than open cholecystectomy for most patients, as long as it does not routinely require preoperative cholangiography and is not associated with increased professional fees or increased risks of retained stones or bile duct injury.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8480883     DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9610(05)80942-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Surg        ISSN: 0002-9610            Impact factor:   2.565


  27 in total

1.  Hand-assisted laparoscopic vertical banded gastroplasty: early results.

Authors:  J I Bleier; A S Krupnick; D Kreisel; H K Song; E F Rosato; N N Williams
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Cost utility of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.

Authors:  Amanda Johner; Adam Raymakers; Sam M Wiseman
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-07-07       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  A minimally invasive approach to the placement of tissue expanders.

Authors:  Brent M Egeland; Paul S Cederna
Journal:  Semin Plast Surg       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 2.314

4.  Laparoscopic surgery at Sultan Qaboos University Hospital.

Authors:  C S Grant; N Al-Kindy; N Machado; A S Daar
Journal:  J Sci Res Med Sci       Date:  2000-01

5.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy as a "true" outpatient procedure: initial experience in 130 consecutive patients.

Authors:  K D Lillemoe; J W Lin; M A Talamini; C J Yeo; D S Snyder; S D Parker
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  1999 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 6.  The E.A.E.S. Consensus Development Conferences on laparoscopic cholecystectomy, appendectomy, and hernia repair. Consensus statements--September 1994. The Educational Committee of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery.

Authors:  E Neugebauer; H Troidl; C K Kum; E Eypasch; M Miserez; A Paul
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  A cost comparison of disposable vs reusable instruments in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  L Demoulin; K Kesteloot; F Penninckx
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Increased cholecystectomy rate after the introduction of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Scotland.

Authors:  C M Lam; F E Murray; A Cuschieri
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 23.059

9.  The cost of laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy in a community hospital.

Authors:  V W Vanek; C C Bourguet
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  D P McKellar; R M Johnson; J A Dutro; J Mellinger; W A Bernie; J B Peoples
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.