Money well spent: a comparison of hospital operating margin for laparoscopic and open colectomies

Assessing the economic advantage of laparoscopic vs. open approaches for colorectal cancer by a propensity score matching analysis

PURPOSES

This study investigated the surgical outcomes and potential economic advantage of open vs. laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer using a propensity score matching analysis.

METHODS

We examined the surgical and economic outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic (N = 127) and open surgery (N = 253) for colorectal cancer and then compared these outcomes in two groups (N = 103 each) using a propensity score matching analysis.

RESULTS

Compared to open surgery, the laparoscopic approach was associated with a significantly lower overall morbidity rate (14 vs. 40%; P < 0.001) and shorter mean (± standard deviation) postoperative hospital stay (12.6 ± 8.3 vs. 16.8 ± 9.9 days, respectively; P = 0.001). Despite generating higher mean surgical costs (Japanese yen) (985,000 ± 215,000 vs. 812,000 ± 222,000 yen; P < 0.001), utilizing a laparoscopic approach significantly reduced the non-surgical costs (773,000 ± 440,000 vs. 1075,000 ± 508,000 yen; P < 0.001). The mean total cost of laparoscopic-assisted surgery (1758,000 ± 576,000 yen) was decreased by approximately 130,000 yen compared with open surgery (1886,000 ± 619,000 yen), although the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.125).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is advantageous in reducing morbidity and facilitating an early discharge and does not increase hospital costs. These findings are consistent with the general consensus supporting the benefits of laparoscopic surgery as a minimally invasive approach.

Recognition and treatment of freezing and nonfreezing cold injuries

This article reviews recent medical literature to provide an overview of the recognition and treatment of the two broad categories of cold injuries, freezing and nonfreezing. Frostbite, a freezing cold injury, is treated traditionally with rapid rewarming followed by tissue care and surgical debridement of necrotic tissue. Recently, newer therapies aimed at prevention of tissue necrosis have shown improved outcomes compared with more traditional therapies. These newer treatment regimens for frostbite include the use of various drugs such as ibuprofen, aspirin, warfarin, tissue plasminogen activator, and prostacyclin. The use of Tc bone scans, magnetic resonance imaging arthrogram, or angiography may have prognostic value for early determination of the extent of tissue loss. The more common nonfreezing cold injuries, though less severe than frostbite, may lead to short- and long-term complications requiring treatment and are discussed also.

A cost comparison of laparoscopic and open colon surgery in a publicly funded academic institution

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to compare the total hospital cost of laparoscopic (lap) and open colon surgery at a publicly funded academic institution.

METHODS

Patients undergoing elective laparoscopic or open colon surgery for all indications at the University Health Network, Toronto, Canada, from April 2004 to March 2009 were included. Patient demographic, operative, and outcome data were reviewed retrospectively. Hospital costs were determined from the Ontario Case Costing Initiative, adjusted for inflation, and compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. Linear regression was used to analyze the relationship between length of stay and total hospital cost.

RESULTS

There were 391 elective colon resections (223 lap/168 open, 15.4 % conversion). There was no difference in median age, gender, or Charlson score. Body mass index was slightly higher for laparoscopic surgery (27.5/25.9 lap/open; p = 0.008), while the American Society of Anesthesiologists score was slightly higher for open surgery. Median operative time was greater for laparoscopic surgery (224/196 min, lap/open; p = 0.001). There was no difference in complication rates (21.6/22.5 % lap/open; p = 0.900), reoperations (5.8/6.5 % lap/open; p = 0.833) or 30-day readmissions (7.6/12.5 % lap/open; p = 0.122). Number of emergency room visits was greater with open surgery (12.6/20.8 % lap/open; p = 0.037). Operative cost was higher for laparoscopic surgery ($4,171.37/3,489.29 lap/open; p = 0.001), while total hospital cost was significantly reduced ($9,600.22/12,721.41 lap/open; p = 0.001). Median length of stay was shorter for laparoscopic surgery (5/7 days lap/open; p = 0.000), and this correlated directly with hospital cost.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic colon surgery is associated with increased operative costs but significantly lower total hospital costs. The cost savings is related, in part, to reduced length of stay with laparoscopic surgery.

Laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision for right colon cancer

Laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer has become a standard of care, with a number of publications highlighting its safety, improved postoperative recovery, and excellent oncologic outcomes. Complete mesocolic excision, recently reemphasized, is associated with superior oncologic outcomes, although this has not been discussed for laparoscopic surgery. A laparoscopic approach was performed for right colon cancer using a four-trocar technique. The key steps demonstrated are identification and high division of the ileocolic pedicle, medial-to-lateral mobilization of the ascending colon preserving the posterior mesocolic fascia, identification and high division of the right branch of the middle colic artery, mobilization of the greater omentum and hepatic flexure, completion of lateral mobilization of the ascending colon from the retroperitoneum, and mobilization of the small bowel mesentery up to the duodenum. A prospective series of 52 consecutive patients with right colon cancer underwent laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision with high-vessel ligation. Four of the patients required laparoscopic en bloc extended resections for local invasion. The median operative time was 136 min (interquartile range [IQR], 105-167 min), and the median blood loss was 20 ml (IQR, 10-45 ml). The median hospital stay was 3 days (IQR, 3-5 days). All the patients had an R0 oncologic resection with median margins of 12 cm, and a median of 22 lymph nodes (IQR, 18-29 lymph nodes) was retrieved. The median follow-up period was 38 months (IQR, 23-54 months). Of 14 patients with tumor-positive lymph nodes, 2 experienced distant recurrence. There were no local recurrences, but four patients experienced metastatic disease at a median of 37 months (IQR, 22-46 months). The median overall survival time was 38 months (IQR, 23-54 months). The embedded didactic video demonstrates a straight laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision with high-vessel ligation for a patient who had a right colon cancer. Laparoscopic right complete mesocolic excision is a safe and effective procedure associated with excellent 3-year oncologic outcomes and accelerated postoperative recovery.

Laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery by a colon lifting-up technique that decreases the number of access ports: comparison by propensity scoring of short-term and long-term outcomes with standard multiport laparoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic colectomy for colorectal cancer has become established as a minimally invasive surgical approach. However, many disposable instruments are required, and there is an associated disadvantage of cost. We have developed a new technique, which uses a suture string to lift up the colon. This method is expected to reduce the number of access ports required without compromising the radical cure.

OPERATIVE PROCEDURE

A suture string piercing the abdominal wall is passed through the mesocolon. The colon is retracted anteriorly and is fixed at the abdominal wall. The main mesenteric vessels are under tension, and lymph node dissection is performed easily by a medial approach. The working space is more stable because the colon is fixed to the abdominal wall.

METHODS

This study examined the short-term and long-term surgical outcomes of laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer using our colon lifting-up technique (CLT), compared with the standard multiport technique. The study design was a case-matched control by propensity scoring. Analyzed variables were sex, age, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, cancer in a different organ, multiple colorectal cancer, operator, operative year, tumor location, operative procedure, adjuvant chemotherapy, and International Union Against Cancer TNM stage.

RESULTS

From 2000 to 2010, 301 patients underwent CLT and 436 standard multiport technique, 148 patients were matched by propensity score and analyzed. Regarding short-term outcomes, there was no difference between the 2 groups. The mean number of ports needed was 3.37±0.48 for CLT (93 with 3 ports, 55 with 4). There were no differences in recurrence-free survival and overall survival in long-term follow-up results for each stage. There were neither recurrences nor complications due to CLT.

CONCLUSIONS

The CLT facilitated laparoscopic colectomy without compromising cure rates. It is a useful method to keep a stable view and to conserve medical resources.

Long-term direct costs before and after proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis: a population-based study in Olmsted County, Minnesota

PURPOSE

This study was designed to test the hypothesis that patients undergoing definitive surgery for chronic ulcerative colitis have reduced direct medical costs after, as compared with before, total proctocolectomy.

METHODS

A population-based cohort of patients who underwent proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis from 1988 to 2007 was identified using the Rochester Epidemiology Project. Total direct healthcare costs were estimated from an administrative database. The primary outcome was the observed cost difference between the two-year period before surgery and the two-year period after a surgery/recovery period (surgery + 180 days). Statistical significance was assessed using paired t-tests and bootstrapping methods. Demographic data were presented as median (interquartile range) or frequency (proportion). Mean costs are reported in 2007 constant dollars.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were Olmsted County, Minnesota, residents at the time of surgery and for the entire period of observation. Overall 40 patients (66%) were men, median age was 42 (range, 31-52) years, and duration of median colitis was four (range, 1-11) years. Operations included ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (n = 45, mean cost of surgery/recovery period = $50,530) and total proctocolectomy with Brooke ileostomy (n = 15, mean cost of surgery/recovery period = $39,309). In the pouch subgroup, direct medical costs on average were reduced by $9,296 (P < 0.001, bootstrapped 95% confidence interval: $324-$15,628) during the two years after recovery. In the Brooke ileostomy subgroup, direct medical costs on average were reduced by $12,529 (P < 0.001, bootstrapped 95% confidence interval: $6,467-$18,688) in the two years after recovery.

CONCLUSION

Surgery for chronic ulcerative colitis resulted in reduced direct costs in the two years after surgical recovery. These observations suggest that surgical intervention for ulcerative colitis is associated with long-term economic benefit.

Opportunity cost: a systematic application to surgery

BACKGROUND

Opportunity cost is the potential gain or loss when a person chooses to perform an activity over its next best alternative. With respect to surgery, opportunity cost can occur if a less efficient technology uses more operating time than its next best alternative. This additional operating time could be used in a productive way that, when economically valued, adds a "cost" to the less efficient technology. Although fundamental to the economist's view of costs and widely used in economic assessments, opportunity cost analysis is infrequently used in economic evaluation of surgical technology. Previous cost comparison studies in the surgical literature have not addressed opportunity cost when estimating the efficiency of competing technologies. With increasing healthcare costs and new technologic advancements in surgery, a surgeon's ability to understand opportunity cost and apply it when choosing between two comparable technologies is essential. Our objective is to present a system to estimate the opportunity cost for given surgical specialties and present a model to demonstrate its principle.

METHODS

To demonstrate the principle of opportunity cost, our model used a hypothetical scenario comparing two clinically equivalent technologies that differed in that the use of one device (Device A) extended operating time in a hypothetical procedure by 30 minutes compared to its competitor device (Device B). How this extra operating time could potentially be used was then valued using the opportunity cost calculated by our study design. Our study design included 5 surgical procedures from 5 surgical specialties that were elective, profitable, high-volume (performed more than 100 times per year), and had a duration of less than 240 minutes. The data were taken from a university hospital setting in 2007 and included procedure volume, profit margin, and duration. The outcome measure was opportunity cost, which was estimated by dividing the selected procedure's profit margin by its duration.

RESULTS

Surgical specialty results are presented in the accompanying Tables. Otolaryngology has the highest opportunity cost at $38/min. This cost was calculated by using myringotomy as the procedure that was elective, short in duration, performed in high volume, and provided the highest profit margin. By applying our model, the otolaryngology surgeon using the less efficient Device A to perform a hypothetical procedure would incur an opportunity cost of $1,140 ($38/min x 30 min). This is because he could have performed additional myringotomy procedures in the time saved had he instead used the more efficient Device B in his hypothetical cases. General surgery has the lowest opportunity cost at $9/min; laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair was the procedure used for its calculation. Under the same model, the general surgeon using Device A would incur an opportunity cost of $270 ($9/min x 30 min). This is because the general surgeon could have performed additional laparoscopic femoral/hernia repairs had she used the more efficient Device B in her hypothetical cases.

CONCLUSION

In acknowledging opportunity cost, a surgeon can more accurately compare the efficiency of competing surgical devices. This comparison is carried out by estimating and applying a dollar amount to the potential utility of time created by the use of the less efficient device.

Laparoscopy in German urology: changing acceptance among urologists

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic techniques have dramatically influenced urologic surgery in the past 2 decades.

OBJECTIVES

A questionnaire was distributed in 2006 to analyse laparoscopic practice patterns in Germany. The results were compared with a survey performed in 2002.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In 2006, 324 German urology departments received a detailed, anonymous, and self-administered questionnaire regarding demographic data, current use, and attitudes concerning laparoscopy. Quantitative evaluation of laparoscopic procedures was performed for 20 indications.

MEASUREMENTS

The response rate was 73% (238 of 324 institutions). Thirty-two responders were affiliated with universities; 95 responders were affiliated with urban hospitals; 101 responders were affiliated with general hospitals; and 9 responders were affiliated with private hospitals. Laparoscopy had been implemented as a standard operating procedure in 82% of the departments, an increase of 28% compared with the 2002 questionnaire. Forty-eight percent of participants expected a similar operating time to that of open surgery, an increase of 16% compared with the 2002 questionnaire. Concerns about the learning curve dropped from 92% in 2002 to 80% in 2006, and concerns about economic disadvantages dropped from 70% in 2002 to 45% in 2006. Criticism regarding lack of sufficient scientific data decreased from 76% in 2002 to 13% in 2006. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomies (>40 per year) were performed in 30 hospitals in 2006, an increase of 27% over 2002. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy was performed 16-40 times per year in 33 of the responding institutions, an increase of 29% over 2002, and laparoscopic radical nephrectomy was performed >40 per year in 10 of the institutions, an increase of 9% over 2002. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty had a reported frequency of 16-40 procedures per year in 11 of the responding institutions, an increase of 10% over 2002, and laparoscopic pyeloplasty had a frequency between 5 and 15 procedures per year in 42 institutions, an increase of 37% over 2002. Only four hospitals performed cystectomy with ileum conduit and with orthotopic bladder substitute (5-15 cases per year).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The results demonstrate the rising acceptance of laparoscopy in urologic surgery (an increase of 28% more departments performing laparoscopy) and an increasing interest in these techniques (an increase of 12% in the response rate). Their value is still limited by the response rate of only 73%.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey demonstrates the increasing impact of laparoscopy on surgical patterns in urology and the increasing acceptance of laparoscopic techniques concerning operating time, learning curve, and scientific approval.