Cothren C Clay, Moore Ernest E, Johnson Jeffrey L, Moore John B, Ciesla David J, Burch Jon M
The Department of Surgery, Denver Health Medical Center and the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, 777 Bannock Street, MC 0206, Denver, CO 80204, USA.
Am J Surg. 2005 Dec;190(6):950-4. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2005.08.026.
Multiple studies have shown laparoscopic appendectomy to be safe for both acute and perforated appendicitis, but there have been conflicting reports as to whether it is superior from a cost perspective. Our academic surgical group, who perform all operative cases with resident physicians, has been challenged to reduce expenses in this era of cost containment. We recognize resident training is an expensive commodity that is poorly reimbursed, and hypothesized laparoscopic appendectomy was too expensive to justify resident teaching of this procedure. The purpose of this study was to determine if laparoscopic appendectomy is more expensive than open appendectomy.
From April 2003 to April 2004, all patients undergoing appendectomy for presumed acute appendicitis at our university-affiliated teaching hospital were reviewed; demographic data, equipment charge, minutes in the operating room (OR), hospital length of stay, and total hospital charge were analyzed. OR minute charges were gradated based on equipment use and level of skilled nursing care. Conversions to open appendectomy were included in the laparoscopic group for analysis.
During the study period, 247 patients underwent appendectomy for preoperative diagnosis of acute appendicitis, with 152 open (113 inflamed, 37 perforated, 2 normal), 88 laparoscopic (69 inflamed, 12 perforated, 7 normal), and 7 converted (2 inflamed, 4 perforated, 1 normal) operations performed. The majority were men (67%) with a mean age of 31.4 +/- 2.2 years. Overall, there was significant difference (P < .05) in intraoperative equipment charge (125.32 dollars +/- 3.99 dollars open versus 1,078.70 dollars +/- 24.06 dollars lap), operative time charge (3,022.16 dollars +/- 57.51 dollars versus 4,065.24 dollars +/- 122.64 dollars), and total hospital charge (12,310 dollars +/- 772 dollars versus 16,773 dollars +/- 1,319 dollars) but no significant difference in operative minutes (56.3 +/- 1.3 versus 57.4 +/- 2.3), operating room minutes (90.5 +/- 1.7 versus 95.7 +/- 2.5), or hospital days (2.6 versus 2.2). In subgroup analysis of patients with uncomplicated appendicitis, open and laparoscopic groups had equivalent hospital days (1.47 versus 1.49) but significantly different hospital charges (9,632.44 dollars versus 14,251.07 dollars).
Although operative time was similar between the 2 groups, operative and total hospital charges were significantly higher in the laparoscopic group. Unless patient factors warrant a laparoscopic approach (questionable diagnosis, obesity), we submit open appendectomy remains the most cost-effective procedure in a teaching environment.
多项研究表明,腹腔镜阑尾切除术对于急性阑尾炎和穿孔性阑尾炎均安全,但从成本角度来看它是否更具优势,相关报道存在矛盾。我们的学术外科团队与住院医师一同开展所有手术病例,在这个成本控制的时代面临着降低费用的挑战。我们认识到住院医师培训成本高昂且报销微薄,因而推测腹腔镜阑尾切除术费用过高,无法为该手术的住院医师教学提供合理依据。本研究的目的是确定腹腔镜阑尾切除术是否比开腹阑尾切除术费用更高。
回顾2003年4月至2004年4月在我们大学附属医院教学医院因疑似急性阑尾炎接受阑尾切除术的所有患者;分析人口统计学数据、设备费用、手术室时长、住院时间和总住院费用。手术室每分钟费用根据设备使用情况和专业护理水平分级。转为开腹阑尾切除术的病例纳入腹腔镜组进行分析。
在研究期间,247例患者因术前诊断为急性阑尾炎接受了阑尾切除术,其中152例为开腹手术(113例发炎,37例穿孔,2例正常),88例为腹腔镜手术(69例发炎,12例穿孔,7例正常),7例为中转手术(2例发炎,4例穿孔,1例正常)。大多数为男性(67%),平均年龄31.4±2.2岁。总体而言,术中设备费用(开腹手术125.32美元±3.99美元,腹腔镜手术1,078.70美元±24.06美元)、手术时间费用(3,022.16美元±57.51美元,4,065.24美元±122.64美元)和总住院费用(12,310美元±772美元,16,773美元±1,319美元)存在显著差异(P <.05),但手术时长(56.3±1.3对57.4±2.3)、手术室时长(90.5±1.7对95.7±2.5)或住院天数(2.6对2.2)无显著差异。在单纯性阑尾炎患者的亚组分析中,开腹组和腹腔镜组的住院天数相当(1.47对1.49),但住院费用差异显著(9,632.44美元对14,251.07美元)。
尽管两组手术时间相似,但腹腔镜组的手术费用和总住院费用显著更高。除非患者因素需要采用腹腔镜手术方式(诊断存疑、肥胖),我们认为在教学环境中,开腹阑尾切除术仍是最具成本效益的手术方式。