Senagore Anthony J, Duepree Hans J, Delaney Conor P, Dissanaike Sharmilla, Brady Karen M, Fazio Victor W
Department of Colorectal Surgery and the Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Dis Colon Rectum. 2002 Apr;45(4):485-90. doi: 10.1007/s10350-004-6225-x.
Although laparoscopic colectomy has demonstrated a variety of advantages, it remains unclear whether the reductions in length of stay and faster return of bowel function will offset potential increases in cost caused by operating time and instrumentation. The purpose of this study was to compare the direct cost structure of elective open and laparoscopic resection for sigmoid diverticulitis.
We compared consecutive elective open and laparoscopic sigmoid colectomies (n = 71 and n = 61, respectively) performed from March 1, 1999, through December 31, 2000. Data collected included age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesia score, indication for surgery, morbidity, mortality, conversion (laparoscopic only), operating time, and length of hospital stay. Direct cost data were provided by Stanford's integrated hospital cost management and decision software. Indirect costs and total costs were not addressed. Data were analyzed by Student's t-test and chi-squared test where appropriate. Significance was set at P < 0.05. All data are presented as mean +/- standard error of the mean.
There were 132 elective sigmoid colectomies for diverticular disease (61 laparoscopic and 71 open procedures). There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to age, male/female ratio, or body mass index. Operating time was similar (109 +/- 7 minutes for laparoscopic procedures vs. 101 +/- 7 minutes for open procedures). The laparoscopic group had a significantly shorter length of stay (3.1 +/- 0.2 vs. 6.8 +/- 0.4 days), fewer pulmonary complications (1 (1.6 percent) vs. 4 (5.6 percent)) and fewer wound infections (0 vs. 5 (7 percent)). Conversion to open colectomy was required in 4 (6.6 percent) of 61 patients. Readmission occurred in three laparoscopic colectomy patients (4.9 percent) and four open colectomy patients (5.6 percent). There was one operative death in the laparoscopic group (1.6 percent) and no deaths in the open group. Total direct cost per case was significantly less for laparoscopic procedures ($3,458 +/- 437) than for open colectomies ($4321 +/- 501; P < 0.05, Student's t-test), and operating costs were not significantly different between the groups.
The data demonstrate that laparoscopic colectomy is a cost-effective means of electively managing sigmoid diverticular disease. This operative approach may become very important in an era of increasing constraints on hospital occupancy rates and access to nursing services in many regions of the country.
尽管腹腔镜结肠切除术已展现出多种优势,但住院时间缩短和肠功能恢复更快是否能抵消手术时间和器械使用导致的潜在成本增加仍不明确。本研究的目的是比较择期开放性和腹腔镜下乙状结肠憩室炎切除术的直接成本结构。
我们比较了1999年3月1日至2000年12月31日期间连续进行的择期开放性和腹腔镜乙状结肠切除术(分别为71例和61例)。收集的数据包括年龄、性别、体重指数、美国麻醉医师协会评分、手术指征、发病率、死亡率、中转情况(仅腹腔镜手术)、手术时间和住院时间。直接成本数据由斯坦福大学综合医院成本管理与决策软件提供。未涉及间接成本和总成本。在适当情况下,数据通过学生t检验和卡方检验进行分析。显著性设定为P < 0.05。所有数据均以平均值±平均标准误差表示。
共有132例因憩室病进行的择期乙状结肠切除术(61例腹腔镜手术和71例开放手术)。两组在年龄、男女比例或体重指数方面无显著差异。手术时间相似(腹腔镜手术为109±7分钟,开放手术为101±7分钟)。腹腔镜组的住院时间明显更短(3.1±0.2天对6.8±0.4天),肺部并发症更少(1例(1.6%)对4例(5.6%)),伤口感染更少(0例对5例(7%))。61例患者中有4例(6.6%)需要中转至开放性结肠切除术。3例腹腔镜结肠切除术患者(4.9%)和4例开放性结肠切除术患者(5.6%)再次入院。腹腔镜组有1例手术死亡(1.6%),开放组无死亡病例。腹腔镜手术每例的总直接成本(3458±437美元)显著低于开放性结肠切除术(4321±501美元;P < 0.05,学生t检验),且两组的手术成本无显著差异。
数据表明,腹腔镜结肠切除术是择期治疗乙状结肠憩室病的一种具有成本效益的方法。在该国许多地区医院床位占用率和护理服务获取受到越来越多限制的时代,这种手术方式可能变得非常重要。