Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 12/2013

01-12-2013

Cost analysis of open and laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a single institution comparison

Authors: Marc G. Mesleh, John A. Stauffer, Steven P. Bowers, Horacio J. Asbun

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 12/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

The laparoscopic approach to pancreaticoduodenectomy has been recently more frequently reported and is now being performed at multiple centers across the US. While laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) has been shown to be safe and feasible, comparing its cost in relation to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) has not been examined. The aim of this study is to examine the cost of LPD compared with OPD at a single institution over a 3-year time period.

Methods

An institutional database was analyzed to compare patients who underwent OPD and LPD (including Whipple resections and total pancreatectomy) between May 2009 and June 2012. A cost analysis was performed, which included the use the hospital billing database to assess surgical costs, hospital admission costs, and overall cost of the patient’s care during the index admission. The operative costs were further analyzed with respect to OR time and surgical supplies. Standard statistical analysis was performed to assess for significance.

Results

In the study time period, 123 patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy, including 48 OPD (39 %) and 75 LPD (61 %). The groups were similar with respect to age, gender, ASA, vein resection, and indication for surgery. In the LPD group, the use of hand assist or conversion to OPD occurred in 3 (4 %) and 10 (13 %) patients, respectively. Additionally, 10 % of the OPD group underwent total pancreatectomy (n = 5), compared to 21 % of the LPD (n = 16). Mean operative time for OPD and LPD was 355 min (range 199–681) and 551 min (range 390–819) respectively (p < 0.0001). Median hospital stay for OPD and LPD was 8 days (range 5–63), and 7 days (range 4–68) respectively (p = 0.5). Morbidity rates were equal at 31 % for the two groups. The LPD group was associated with significantly higher surgical cost due to both increased time and supply cost. However, mean hospital admission cost associated with OPD was greater in comparison to the LPD group, though not significant. The overall total cost of care was similar between the two groups.

Conclusions

LPD is associated with equivalent overall cost compared with OPD. While operating time and supply costs were higher for LPD, this was balanced by decreased cost of the postoperative admission.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Ellison EC, Carey LC (2008) Lessons learned from the evolution of the laparoscopic revolution. Surg Clin North Am 88:927–941 vPubMedCrossRef Ellison EC, Carey LC (2008) Lessons learned from the evolution of the laparoscopic revolution. Surg Clin North Am 88:927–941 vPubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Palanivelu C, Rajan PS, Rangarajan M, Vaithiswaran V, Senthilnathan P, Parthasarathi R, Praveen Raj P (2009) Evolution in techniques of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a decade long experience from a tertiary center. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 16:731–740PubMedCrossRef Palanivelu C, Rajan PS, Rangarajan M, Vaithiswaran V, Senthilnathan P, Parthasarathi R, Praveen Raj P (2009) Evolution in techniques of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a decade long experience from a tertiary center. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 16:731–740PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Kendrick ML, Cusati D (2010) Total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: feasibility and outcome in an early experience. Arch Surg 145:19–23PubMedCrossRef Kendrick ML, Cusati D (2010) Total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: feasibility and outcome in an early experience. Arch Surg 145:19–23PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Asbun HJ, Stauffer JA (2012) Laparoscopic vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy: overall outcomes and severity of complications using the Accordion Severity Grading System. J Am Coll Surg 215:810–819PubMedCrossRef Asbun HJ, Stauffer JA (2012) Laparoscopic vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy: overall outcomes and severity of complications using the Accordion Severity Grading System. J Am Coll Surg 215:810–819PubMedCrossRef
5.
6.
go back to reference DeOliveira ML, Winter JM, Schafer M, Cunningham SC, Cameron JL, Yeo CJ, Clavien PA (2006) Assessment of complications after pancreatic surgery: a novel grading system applied to 633 patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 244:931–937 discussion 937-939PubMedCrossRef DeOliveira ML, Winter JM, Schafer M, Cunningham SC, Cameron JL, Yeo CJ, Clavien PA (2006) Assessment of complications after pancreatic surgery: a novel grading system applied to 633 patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 244:931–937 discussion 937-939PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G, Fingerhut A, Yeo C, Izbicki J, Neoptolemos J, Sarr M, Traverso W, Buchler M (2005) Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery 138:8–13PubMedCrossRef Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G, Fingerhut A, Yeo C, Izbicki J, Neoptolemos J, Sarr M, Traverso W, Buchler M (2005) Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery 138:8–13PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Wente MN, Bassi C, Dervenis C, Fingerhut A, Gouma DJ, Izbicki JR, Neoptolemos JP, Padbury RT, Sarr MG, Traverso LW, Yeo CJ, Buchler MW (2007) Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after pancreatic surgery: a suggested definition by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). Surgery 142:761–768PubMedCrossRef Wente MN, Bassi C, Dervenis C, Fingerhut A, Gouma DJ, Izbicki JR, Neoptolemos JP, Padbury RT, Sarr MG, Traverso LW, Yeo CJ, Buchler MW (2007) Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after pancreatic surgery: a suggested definition by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). Surgery 142:761–768PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Lewis R, Drebin JA, Callery MP, Fraker D, Kent TS, Gates J, Vollmer CM Jr (2013) A contemporary analysis of survival for resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. HPB (Oxford) 15:49–60CrossRef Lewis R, Drebin JA, Callery MP, Fraker D, Kent TS, Gates J, Vollmer CM Jr (2013) A contemporary analysis of survival for resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. HPB (Oxford) 15:49–60CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Venkat R, Edil BH, Schulick RD, Lidor AO, Makary MA, Wolfgang CL (2012) Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is associated with significantly less overall morbidity compared to the open technique: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 255:1048–1059PubMedCrossRef Venkat R, Edil BH, Schulick RD, Lidor AO, Makary MA, Wolfgang CL (2012) Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is associated with significantly less overall morbidity compared to the open technique: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 255:1048–1059PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Fox AM, Pitzul K, Bhojani F, Kaplan M, Moulton CA, Wei AC, McGilvray I, Cleary S, Okrainec A (2012) Comparison of outcomes and costs between laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and open resection at a single center. Surg Endosc 26:1220–1230PubMedCrossRef Fox AM, Pitzul K, Bhojani F, Kaplan M, Moulton CA, Wei AC, McGilvray I, Cleary S, Okrainec A (2012) Comparison of outcomes and costs between laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and open resection at a single center. Surg Endosc 26:1220–1230PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Limongelli P, Belli A, Russo G, Cioffi L, D’Agostino A, Fantini C, Belli G (2012) Laparoscopic and open surgical treatment of left-sided pancreatic lesions: clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness analysis. Surg Endosc 26:1830–1836PubMedCrossRef Limongelli P, Belli A, Russo G, Cioffi L, D’Agostino A, Fantini C, Belli G (2012) Laparoscopic and open surgical treatment of left-sided pancreatic lesions: clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness analysis. Surg Endosc 26:1830–1836PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Abu Hilal M, Hamdan M, Di Fabio F, Pearce NW, Johnson CD (2012) Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy: a clinical and cost-effectiveness study. Surg Endosc 26:1670–1674PubMedCrossRef Abu Hilal M, Hamdan M, Di Fabio F, Pearce NW, Johnson CD (2012) Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy: a clinical and cost-effectiveness study. Surg Endosc 26:1670–1674PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Zeh HJ, Zureikat AH, Secrest A, Dauoudi M, Bartlett D, Moser AJ (2012) Outcomes after robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary lesions. Ann Surg Oncol 19:864–870PubMedCrossRef Zeh HJ, Zureikat AH, Secrest A, Dauoudi M, Bartlett D, Moser AJ (2012) Outcomes after robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary lesions. Ann Surg Oncol 19:864–870PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Kang CM, Kim DH, Lee WJ, Chi HS (2011) Conventional laparoscopic and robot-assisted spleen-preserving pancreatectomy: does da Vinci have clinical advantages? Surg Endosc 25:2004–2009PubMedCrossRef Kang CM, Kim DH, Lee WJ, Chi HS (2011) Conventional laparoscopic and robot-assisted spleen-preserving pancreatectomy: does da Vinci have clinical advantages? Surg Endosc 25:2004–2009PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Cost analysis of open and laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a single institution comparison
Authors
Marc G. Mesleh
John A. Stauffer
Steven P. Bowers
Horacio J. Asbun
Publication date
01-12-2013
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 12/2013
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3101-6

Other articles of this Issue 12/2013

Surgical Endoscopy 12/2013 Go to the issue