• Surgical endoscopy · Mar 2007

    Comparative Study

    A prospective case-matched comparison of clinical and financial outcomes of open versus laparoscopic colorectal resection.

    • S E Noblett and A F Horgan.
    • Department of Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Freeman Road, Newcastle Upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
    • Surg Endosc. 2007 Mar 1;21(3):404-8.

    BackgroundWe aimed to assess the clinical outcomes and costs associated with laparoscopic resection within an elective colorectal practice.MethodOver a 12-month period data were prospectively collected on patients undergoing elective colorectal resection under the care of a single consultant surgeon. Thirty patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resection were case-matched by type of resection, disease process, and, where appropriate, cancer stage to patients having open surgery. A cost analysis was carried out incorporating cost of surgical bed stay, theater time, and specific equipment costs.ResultsIn the 30 patients having laparoscopic resection, a conversion rate of 13% was observed. Surgery was performed for colorectal cancer in 83% of patients, and 53% of resections were rectal. No significant differences were found in age (65 versus 69 years, p = 0.415), BMI (27.4 versus 26.1, p = 0.527), POSSUM physiology score (16 versus 16.5, p = 0.102), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade (2 versus 2, p = 0.171), or length of theater time (160 min versus 160 min, p = 0.233) between the laparoscopic and open patients. Hospital stay was reduced in the laparoscopic group (5 versus 9 days, p < 0.001). Average cost of surgical equipment used for a laparoscopic resection was greater than for open surgery (912.39 versus 276.41 pounds, p = 0.001). Cost of hospital stay was significantly less (1259.75 versus 2267.55 pounds, p < 0.001). Cost of operating room time was similar for the two groups (2066.63 versus 1945.07 pounds, p = 0.152). Overall no significant cost difference could be found between open and laparoscopic resection (4560.9 versus 4348.45 pounds, p = 0.976). More postoperative complications were seen in the open resection group (14 versus 4, p < 0.001).ConclusionsIntraoperative equipment costs are greater for laparoscopic resection than for open surgery. However, benefits can be seen in terms of quicker recovery and shorter hospital stay. Laparoscopic surgery is a financially viable alternative to open resection in selected patients.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.