Staplers vs. loop-ligature: a cost analysis from the hospital payer perspective

Effect of endoscopic loop ties in acute appendicitis on wound infection rate: A meta-analysis

A meta-analysis study to measure the consequence of endoscopic loop ties (ELT) in acute appendicitis (AA) on wound infection rate. A comprehensive literature inspection till February 2023 was applied and 2765 interrelated studies were reviewed. The 27 chosen studies enclosed 15 093 subjects with AA in the chosen studies' starting point, 7141 of them were ELT, and 7952 were open surgery. Odds ratio (OR) in addition to 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to compute the value of the effect of ELT in AA on wound infection rate by the dichotomous and continuous styles and a fixed or random model. Open surgery had a significantly higher postoperative surgical site wound infection (SSWI). (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.09-1.83, P = 0.009) with low heterogeneity (I2  = 34%) compared to ELT in AA subjects. Although no significant difference was detected between open surgery and ELT in intra-abdominal abscess rate (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.56-1.40, P = 0.59) with moderate heterogeneity (I2  = 51%) in AA subjects. Open surgery had a significantly higher postoperative SSWI, however, no significant difference was found in intra-abdominal abscess rate compared to ELT in AA subjects. However, caused by the small sample sizes of several chosen studies for this meta-analysis, care must be exercised when dealing with its values.

Proper use of appendiceal stump closure methods for surgical site infection in laparoscopic appendectomy

INTRODUCTION

Although some studies have reported on the relationship between appendiceal stump closure methods and postoperative complications, there is no fixed method for this procedure. This study aimed to compare treatment outcomes of the existing procedures.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the records of 200 patients who underwent urgent laparoscopic surgeries and investigated whether the difference in the appendiceal stump closure method was a risk factor for surgical site infection. The patients were divided into the Endoloop and endostapler groups, and 45 propensity score-matched patients were included. The treatment outcomes of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

The patients with high body temperature showed significantly developed surgical site infection in multivariate analysis (P = .036). There was no significant difference in the appendix stump methods (Endoloop vs endostapler). Regarding postoperative complications, superficial and deep incisional surgical site infection, organ/space surgical site infection, ileus, and complications of Clavien-Dindo grade IIIa or higher; there was no significant difference between the endoloop and endostapler groups after propensity score matching (P = .725, 1.000, .645 and .557, respectively).

CONCLUSION

By properly using the Endoloop and endostapler according to the severity of inflammation, the Endoloop can be safely performed in many cases. Inexpensive Endoloop as an option for stump closure methods should positively impact medical costs.

Purse-string suture after ligating by endoloop for closing of the appendiceal stump is an alternative for endostapler in selected cases: A propensity score-matched study

INTRODUCTION

The closure of the appendiceal stump is a crucial part of a laparoscopic appendectomy, and an endoloop or endostapler is generally used. The endoloop can be more cost effective than the endostapler. However, reports have shown that the endoloop has a higher postoperative abdominal abscess rate than the endostapler in complicated appendicitis. At our institution, we perform a purse-string suture after ligating by endoloop to reduce postoperative abdominal abscess risk. This study aimed to clarify whether this method could reduce the incidence of postoperative abdominal abscess compared with the endostapler.

METHODS

Patients with acute appendicitis were classified into the purse-string suture group (n = 149) and the endostapler group (n = 82). Postoperative outcomes were compared after propensity score matching (n = 47).

RESULTS

No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of the patient characteristics and postoperative complications, including abdominal abscess. However, the purse-string suture group had more drain placement and a shorter hospital stay than the endostapler group (P = .04 and P = .02, respectively). In patients with complicated appendicitis, there was less drain placement and a shorter hospital stay in the purse-string suture group than in the endostapler group (P < .01 and P < .01, respectively). This might have reflected the difficulty of the operation. All postoperative abdominal abscesses occurred in complicated appendicitis cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoloop with additional purse-string suture had a lower incidence of abscess than previous reports of using endoloop alone. Moreover, the postoperative abdominal abscess rate is similar between the two closure methods.

Cost analysis of laparoscopic appendectomy in a large integrated healthcare system

INTRODUCTION

Healthcare expenditure is on the rise placing greater emphasis on operational excellence, cost containment, and high quality of care. Significant variation is seen in operating room (OR) costs with common surgical procedures such as laparoscopic appendectomy. Surgeons can influence cost through the selection of instrumentation for common surgical procedures such as laparoscopic appendectomy. We aimed to quantify the cost of laparoscopic appendectomy in our healthcare system and compare cost variations to operative times and outcomes.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

We performed a retrospective review of laparoscopic appendectomies in a large regional healthcare system during one-year period (2018). Operating room supply costs and procedure durations were obtained for each hospital. The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) outcomes and demographics were compared to the costs for each hospital.

RESULTS

A total of 4757 laparoscopic appendectomies were performed at 20 hospitals (27 to 522 per hospital) by 233 surgeons. The average supply cost per case ranged from $650 to $1067. Individual surgeon cost ranged from $197 to $1181. The average operative time was 41 min (range 33 to 60 min). There was no association between lower cost and longer operative time. The patient demographics and comorbidities were similar between sites. There were no significant differences in postoperative complications between high- and low-cost centers. The items with the greatest increase in cost were single-use energy devices (SUD) and endoscopic stapler. We estimate that a saving of over $417 per case is possible by avoiding the use of energy devices and may be as high as $ 984 by adding selective use of staplers. These modifications would result in an annual savings of $1 million for our health system and more than $ 125 million nationwide.

CONCLUSION

Performing laparoscopic appendectomy with reusable instruments and finding alternatives to expensive energy devices and staplers can significantly decrease costs and does not increase operative time or postoperative complications.

Is the use of endoloops safe and efficient for the closure of the appendicular stump in complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis?

INTRODUCTION

There is still controversy regarding the ideal technique to close the appendicular stump in laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). The objective of this study was to determine the safety and efficiency of the use of an endoloop (EL) and endostapler (ES) in complicated and uncomplicated acute appendicitis.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing LA from February 2013 to December 2019. Acute uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis were analysed separately, establishing two groups according to the stump closure technique: EL or ES. Seven hundred-nine patients were included (535 uncomplicated and 174 complicated). In uncomplicated appendicitis, an EL was used in 447 of the patients (83.55%) and an ES was used in 88 patients (16.45%). In complicated appendicitis, an EL was used in 85 patients (48.85%) and an ES was used in 89 patients (51.15%). An analysis of effectiveness and a cost analysis of each technique were performed.

RESULTS

In uncomplicated appendicitis, we found no differences with respect to global complications, although there were significant differences in the total mean hospital stay (EL group 1.55 (SD 1.48) days; ES group 2.21 (SD 1.69) days; p = 0.046). This meant a savings of 514.12€ per patient using the EL p < 0.001). In complicated appendicitis, the reoperations classified as Clavien-Dindo IIIB in the EL group (6.4%) were greater than in the ES group (0%) (p = 0.012), although the rate of postoperative abscesses (p = 0.788) and the mean volume of abscesses (p = 0.891) were similar.

CONCLUSION

The systematic use of an EL could reduce costs in uncomplicated appendicitis, while in complicated cases, both options are valid. Prospective studies with a greater number of patients are needed to observe differences in postoperative complications.

Cost-Effective Approach to the Laparoscopic Appendectomy : Balancing Disposable Instrument Cost With Operative Time

BACKGROUND

Surgeons can help reduce health care spending by selecting affordable and efficient instruments. The laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is commonly performed and can serve as a model for improving health care cost.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all adult patients who underwent LA for non-perforated appendicitis from March 2015 to November 2017. Our objective was to determine which combination of disposable instruments afforded the lowest total operative cost without compromising postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

In total, 1857 consecutive patients were reviewed from 2 hospitals. After determining the 8 most commonly utilized combinations of disposable instruments, 846 patients were ultimately analyzed. The combination of a LigaSure, Endoloop, and an EndoBag (LEB) had the shortest median operative time (25 minutes, P < .001) and lowest median total operative cost ($1893, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The LEB instrument combination rendered the shortest operative time, lowest total operative cost, and can be used to maximize surgical value during LA.

The SIFIPAC/WSES/SICG/SIMEU guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis in the elderly (2019 edition)

The epidemiology and the outcomes of acute appendicitis in elderly patients are very different from the younger population. Elderly patients with acute appendicitis showed higher mortality, higher perforation rate, lower diagnostic accuracy, longer delay from symptoms onset and admission, higher postoperative complication rate and higher risk of colonic and appendiceal cancer. The aim of the present work was to investigate age-related factors that could influence a different approach, compared to the 2016 WSES Jerusalem guidelines on general population, in terms of diagnosis and management of elderly patient with acute appendicitis. During the XXIX National Congress of the Italian Society of Surgical Pathophysiology (SIFIPAC) held in Cesena (Italy) in May 2019, in collaboration with the Italian Society of Geriatric Surgery (SICG), the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) and the Italian Society of Emergency Medicine (SIMEU), a panel of experts participated to a Consensus Conference where eight panelists presented a number of statements, which were developed for each of the four topics about diagnosis and management of acute appendicitis in elderly patients, formulated according to the GRADE system. The statements were then voted, eventually modified and finally approved by the participants to the Consensus Conference. The current paper is reporting the definitive guidelines statements on each of the following topics: diagnosis, non-operative management, operative management and antibiotic therapy.