Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Surgical Endoscopy
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 5/2016

01-05-2016

The First Decade of Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy in the United States: Costs and Outcomes Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample

Authors: Thuy B. Tran, MD, Monica M. Dua, MD, David J. Worhunsky, MD, George A. Poultsides, MD, MS, Jeffrey A. Norton, MD, Brendan C. Visser, MD

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 5/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) remains an uncommon procedure, and the safety and efficacy remain uncertain beyond single institution case series. The aim of this study is to compare outcomes and costs between laparoscopic (LPD) and open PD (OPD) using a large population-based database.

Methods

The Nationwide Inpatient Sample database (a sample of approximately 20 % of all hospital discharges) was analyzed to identify patients who underwent PD from 2000 to 2010. Patient demographics, comorbidities, hospital characteristics, inflation-adjusted total charges, and complications were evaluated using univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Hospitals were categorized as high-volume hospitals (HVH) if more than 20 PD (open and laparoscopic) were performed annually, while those performing fewer than 20 PD were classified as low-volume hospitals.

Results

Of the 15,574 PD identified, 681 cases were LPD (4.4 %). Compared to OPD, patients who underwent LPD were slightly older (65 vs. 67 years; p = 0.001) and were more commonly treated at HVH (56.6 vs. 66.1 %; p < 0.001). Higher rates of complications were observed in OPD than LPD (46 vs. 39.4 %; p = 0.001), though mortality rates were comparable (5 vs. 3.8 %, p = 0.27). Inflation-adjusted median hospital charges were similar between OPD and LPD ($87,577 vs. $81,833, p = 0.199). However, hospital stay was slightly longer in the OPD group compared to LPD group (12 vs. 11 days, p < 0.001). Stratifying outcomes by hospital volume, LPD at HVH resulted in shorter hospital stays (9 vs. 13 days, p < 0.001), which translated into significantly lower median hospital charges ($76,572 vs. $106,367, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Contrary to fears regarding the potential for compromised outcomes early in the learning curve, LPD morbidity in its first decade is modestly reduced, while hospital costs are comparable to OPD. In high-volume pancreatic hospitals, LPD is associated with a reduction in length of stay and hospital costs.
Literature
1.
Haverkamp L, Weijs TJ, van der Sluis PC, van der Tweel I, Ruurda JP, van Hillegersberg R (2013) Laparoscopic total gastrectomy versus open total gastrectomy for cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 27:1509–1520CrossRefPubMed
2.
Winslow ER, Brunt LM (2003) Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic versus open splenectomy: a meta-analysis with an emphasis on complications. Surgery 134:647–653 (discussion 654-645) CrossRefPubMed
3.
Cameron JL, He J (2015) Two thousand consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies. J Am Coll Surg 220:530–536CrossRefPubMed
4.
Schmidt CM, Turrini O, Parikh P, House MG, Zyromski NJ, Nakeeb A, Howard TJ, Pitt HA, Lillemoe KD (2010) Effect of hospital volume, surgeon experience, and surgeon volume on patient outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a single-institution experience. Arch Surg 145:634–640CrossRefPubMed
5.
Tseng JF, Pisters PW, Lee JE, Wang H, Gomez HF, Sun CC, Evans DB (2007) The learning curve in pancreatic surgery. Surgery 141:694–701CrossRefPubMed
6.
7.
de la Fuente SG (2013) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomies: a word of caution. J Am Coll Surg 216:1218CrossRefPubMed
8.
Kooby DA (2006) Laparoscopic surgery for cancer: historical, theoretical, and technical considerations. Oncology (Williston Park) 20:917–927 (discussion 927-918, 931-912)
9.
Gagner M, Palermo M (2009) Laparoscopic whipple procedure: review of the literature. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 16:726–730CrossRefPubMed
10.
Kendrick ML, Cusati D (2010) Total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: feasibility and outcome in an early experience. Arch Surg 145:19–23CrossRefPubMed
11.
Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Harris DR, Coffey RM (1998) Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care 36:8–27CrossRefPubMed
12.
Meguid RA, Ahuja N, Chang DC (2008) What constitutes a “high-volume” hospital for pancreatic resection? J Am Coll Surg 206(622):e621–e629
13.
Fong Y, Gonen M, Rubin D, Radzyner M, Brennan MF (2005) Long-term survival is superior after resection for cancer in high-volume centers. Ann Surg 242:540–544 (discussion 544-547) PubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Birkmeyer JD, Finlayson SR, Tosteson AN, Sharp SM, Warshaw AL, Fisher ES (1999) Effect of hospital volume on in-hospital mortality with pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surgery 125:250–256CrossRefPubMed
15.
Kooby DA, Hawkins WG, Schmidt CM, Weber SM, Bentrem DJ, Gillespie TW, Sellers JB, Merchant NB, Scoggins CR, Martin RC 3rd, Kim HJ, Ahmad S, Cho CS, Parikh AA, Chu CK, Hamilton NA, Doyle CJ, Pinchot S, Hayman A, McClaine R, Nakeeb A, Staley CA, McMasters KM, Lillemoe KD (2010) A multicenter analysis of distal pancreatectomy for adenocarcinoma: is laparoscopic resection appropriate? J Am Coll Surg 210:779–785 (786-777) CrossRefPubMed
16.
Vijan SS, Ahmed KA, Harmsen WS, Que FG, Reid-Lombardo KM, Nagorney DM, Donohue JH, Farnell MB, Kendrick ML (2010) Laparoscopic vs open distal pancreatectomy: a single-institution comparative study. Arch Surg 145:616–621CrossRefPubMed
17.
Rutz DR, Squires MH, Maithel SK, Sarmiento JM, Etra JW, Perez SD, Knechtle W, Cardona K, Russell MC, Staley CA 3rd, Sweeney JF, Kooby DA (2014) Cost comparison analysis of open versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. HPB (Oxford) 16:907–914CrossRef
18.
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 26:1830–1836CrossRefPubMed
19.
20.
Palanivelu C, Jani K, Senthilnathan P, Parthasarathi R, Rajapandian S, Madhankumar MV (2007) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: technique and outcomes. J Am Coll Surg 205:222–230CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zureikat AH, Breaux JA, Steel JL, Hughes SJ (2011) Can laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy be safely implemented? J Gastrointest Surg 15(7):1151–1157CrossRefPubMed
22.
Song KB, Kim SC, Hwang DW, Lee JH, Lee DJ, Lee JW, Park KM, Lee YJ (2015) Matched case–control analysis comparing laparoscopic and open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with periampullary tumors. Ann Surg 262(1):146–155. doi:10.​1097/​SLA.​0000000000001079​
23.
Dokmak S, Fteriche FS, Aussilhou B, Bensafta Y, Levy P, Ruszniewski P, Belghiti J, Sauvanet A (2015) Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy Should Not Be Routine for Resection of Periampullary Tumors. J Am Coll Surg
24.
Strasberg SM, Ludbrook PA (2003) Who oversees innovative practice? Is there a structure that meets the monitoring needs of new techniques? J Am Coll Surg 196:938–948CrossRefPubMed
25.
Mesleh MG, Stauffer JA, Bowers SP, Asbun HJ (2013) Cost analysis of open and laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a single institution comparison. Surg Endosc 27:4518–4523CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
The First Decade of Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy in the United States: Costs and Outcomes Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample
Authors
Thuy B. Tran, MD
Monica M. Dua, MD
David J. Worhunsky, MD
George A. Poultsides, MD, MS
Jeffrey A. Norton, MD
Brendan C. Visser, MD
Publication date
01-05-2016
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 5/2016
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4444-y

Other articles of this Issue 5/2016

Surgical Endoscopy 5/2016 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Trans-oral cricomyotomy using a flexible endoscope: technique and clinical outcomes

OriginalPaper

Laparoscopic lateral pelvic lymph node dissection is achievable and offers advantages as a minimally invasive surgery over the open approach

OriginalPaper

Major bile duct injury requiring operative reconstruction after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a follow-on study

OriginalPaper

Previous weight loss as a predictor of weight loss outcomes after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding

OriginalPaper

The uncinate process first approach: a novel technique for laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision

OriginalPaper

First-line endoscopic treatment with OTSC in patients with high-risk non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: preliminary experience in 40 cases