Banka Gaurav, Woodard Gavitt, Hernandez-Boussard Tina, Morton John M
Stanford Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Section of Minimally Invasive and Bariatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305-5655, USA.
Arch Surg. 2012 Jun;147(6):550-6. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.2012.195.
To determine national outcome differences between laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and open Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (ORYGB).
Retrospective cohort study.
The Nationwide Inpatient Sample.
Patients undergoing ORYGB and LRYGB.
Outcome measures were number of procedures performed, patient and hospital characteristics, patient complications, mortality, length of stay, resource use, and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Patient Safety Indicators. Both demographic and outcomes variables were compared by either t test or χ2 analysis, with regression analysis adjusting for confounding variables.
The ORYGB and LRYGB cohorts consisted of 41 094 and 115 177 cases, respectively. From 2005 to 2007, LRYGB was more commonly performed than ORYGB (72% vs 28%; P < .001) and at high-volume hospitals (69% vs 61%; P < .001). A higher percentage of ORYGB compared with LRYGB patients were Medicare (9.3% vs 7.1%) and Medicaid (10.4% vs 5.9%; P < .01) beneficiaries. More ORYGB patients compared with LRYGB patients were discharged with nonroutine dispositions (7.7% vs 2.4%; P = .005), died (0.2% vs 0.1%; P < .001), and had 1 or more complications (18.7% vs 12.3%; P < .001). All Patient Safety Indicator rates were higher for ORYGB. Patients who had ORYGB compared with LRYGB also had longer median lengths of stay (3.5 vs 2.4 days; P < .001) and higher total charges ($35 018 vs $32 671; P < .001). Patients who had LRYGB had a lower odds ratio than patients who had ORYGB for both mortality (odds ratio, 0.54; P < .001) and having 1 or more complications (odds ratio, 0.66; P < .001) even after adjusting for confounding variables.
In this population-based study, LRYGB provided greater safety than ORYGB even after adjusting for patient-level socioeconomic and comorbidity differences.
确定腹腔镜Roux-en-Y胃旁路术(LRYGB)与开放Roux-en-Y胃旁路术(ORYGB)在全国范围内的疗效差异。
回顾性队列研究。
全国住院患者样本。
接受ORYGB和LRYGB手术的患者。
观察指标包括手术例数、患者及医院特征、患者并发症、死亡率、住院时间、资源利用以及医疗保健研究与质量局患者安全指标。通过t检验或χ2分析比较人口统计学和疗效变量,并采用回归分析对混杂变量进行校正。
ORYGB队列和LRYGB队列分别包含41094例和115177例病例。2005年至2007年期间,LRYGB的实施频率高于ORYGB(72%对28%;P<.001),且在高容量医院中更为常见(69%对61%;P<.001)。与LRYGB患者相比,ORYGB患者中医疗保险(9.3%对7.1%)和医疗补助(10.4%对5.9%;P<.01)受益人的比例更高。与LRYGB患者相比,更多ORYGB患者出院时伴有非常规情况(7.7%对2.4%;P=.005)、死亡(0.2%对0.1%;P<.001)以及发生1种或更多并发症(18.7%对12.3%;P<.001)。ORYGB的所有患者安全指标发生率均更高。与LRYGB患者相比,接受ORYGB的患者中位住院时间更长(3.5天对2.4天;P<.001),总费用更高(35018美元对32671美元;P<.001)。即使在对混杂变量进行校正后,LRYGB患者的死亡率(比值比,0.54;P<.001)和发生1种或更多并发症的比值比(比值比,0.66;P<.001)均低于ORYGB患者。
在这项基于人群的研究中,即使对患者层面的社会经济和合并症差异进行校正后,LRYGB仍比ORYGB具有更高的安全性。