Robotic right colectomy versus laparoscopic right colectomy in patients with right colon cancer: a comparative study.

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of robotic right colectomy (RRC) versus laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) in patients diagnosed with right colon cancer, given the increasing adoption of robotic surgical techniques and their potential benefits in oncologic surgery. METHODS: This retrospective comparative study included patients who underwent right colectomy at Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, between January 2019 and May 2022. The primary outcomes measured were the number of lymph nodes harvested. Key secondary outcomes included the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications, hospitalization costs, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS). Data were analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS: A total of 225 patients (aged 65.23 ± 11.45, 108 males) with right colon cancer were included, with 100 (44.4%) patients underwent RRC. Patients who underwent RRC had significantly more lymph nodes harvested (27.69 ± 12.59 vs. 24.43 ± 9.42, P = 0.028), and incurred higher total hospitalization costs compared to those with LRC (9.68 ± 7.12 vs. 5.28 ± 1.23 ten-thousand-yuan, P < 0.001). The OS and DFS were comparable between RRC and LRC (both P > 0.05) within a median follow-up of 27 (range, 9-44) months. Multivariable cox proportional hazards regression showed that patients underwent RRC had significantly higher risk for all-cause death compared with those underwent LRC [hazards ratio (HR) = 2.303, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.625-3.265, P < 0.001]. CONCLUSION: Patients underwent RRC seemed to have significantly more numbers of lymph nodes harvested and higher risk for all-cause death and higher hospitalization costs compared with those underwent LRC. These findings suggest a need for careful consideration of the benefits and risks associated with robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Cost-benefit analysis and short-term outcomes after implementing an ERAS protocol for colorectal surgery: a propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) has become increasingly popular in the post-operative management of abdominal surgery. Published data suggest that patients on ERAS protocols have fewer minor and major complications, and highlight a reduction in medical morbidity (such as urinary and respiratory infections). Limited data is available on surgical complications. The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of the ERAS protocol on post-operative complications and length of hospital stay. Furthermore, we aimed to determine the impact of this protocol on cost-effectiveness. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From January 2016 to December 2022, 532 colectomies for colorectal cancer (CRC) were performed. A prospective observational study was conducted in a tertiary hospital on the cohort of patients, aged 18 years and older, operated on for non-urgent colorectal cancer. The impact on post-operative complications, hospital stay and economic impact was analysed in two groups: patients managed under ERAS and non-ERAS protocol. A propensity score-matching analysis was performed between the two groups. RESULTS: After propensity score matching 1:1, each cohort included 71 patients, and clinicopathological characteristics were well balanced in terms of tumour type, surgical technique and surgical approach. ERAS patients experienced fewer infectious complications and a shorter postoperative stay (p < 0.001). In particular, they had an 8.5% reduction in anastomotic dehiscence (p = 0.012) and surgical wound infections (p = 0.029). After analysis of medical complications, no statistically significant differences were identified in urinary tract infections, pneumonia, gastrointestinal bleeding or sepsis. ERAS protocol was more efficient and cost-effective than the control group, with an overall savings of 37,673.44€. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol for elective colorectal surgery in a tertiary hospital was cost-effective and associated with a reduction in post-operative complications, especially infectious complications.

Minimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery: an observational study of medicare advantage and fee-for-service beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Enrollment of Medicare beneficiaries in medicare advantage (MA) plans has been steadily increasing. Prior research has shown differences in healthcare access and outcomes based on Medicare enrollment status. This study sought to compare utilization of minimally invasive colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery and postoperative outcomes between MA and Fee-for-Service (FFS) beneficiaries. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of beneficiaries ≥ 65.5 years of age enrolled in FFS and MA plans was performed of patients undergoing a CRC resection from 2016 to 2019. The primary outcome was operative approach, defined as minimally invasive (laparoscopic) or open. Secondary outcomes included robotic assistance, hospital length-of-stay, mortality, discharge disposition, and hospital readmission. Using balancing weights, we performed a tapered analysis to examine outcomes with adjustment for potential confounders. RESULTS: MA beneficiaries were less likely to have lymph node (12.9 vs 14.4%, p < 0.001) or distant metastases (15.5% vs 17.0%, p < 0.001), and less likely to receive chemotherapy (6.2% vs 6.7%, p < 0.001), compared to FFS beneficiaries. MA beneficiaries had a higher risk-adjusted likelihood of undergoing laparoscopic CRC resection (OR 1.12 (1.10-1.15), p < 0.001), and similar rates of robotic assistance (OR 1.00 (0.97-1.03), p = 0.912), compared to FFS beneficiaries. There were no differences in risk-adjusted length-of-stay (ß coefficient 0.03 (- 0.05-0.10), p = 0.461) or mortality at 30-60-and 90-days (OR 0.99 (0.95-1.04), p = 0.787; OR 1.00 (0.96-1.04), p = 0.815; OR 0.98 (0.95-1.02), p = 0.380). MA beneficiaries had a lower likelihood of non-routine disposition (OR 0.77 (0.75-0.78), p < 0.001) and readmission at 30-60-and 90-days (OR 0.76 (0.73-0.80), p < 0.001; OR 0.78 (0.75-0.81), p < 0.001; OR 0.79 (0.76-0.81), p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: MA beneficiaries had less advanced disease at the time of CRC resection and a greater likelihood of undergoing a laparoscopic procedure. MA enrollment is associated with improved health outcomes for elderly beneficiaries undergoing operative treatment for CRC.

Robotic surgery versus conventional laparoscopy in sigmoid colectomy for diverticular disease-a comparison of operative trauma and cost-effectiveness: retrospective, single-center analysis.

PURPOSE: Robotic assisted surgery is an alternative, fast evolving technique for performing colorectal surgery. The primary aim of this single center analysis is to compare elective laparoscopic and robotic sigmoid colectomies for diverticular disease on the extent of operative trauma and the costs. METHODS: Retrospective analysis from our prospective clinical database to identify all consecutive patients aged ≥ 18 years who underwent elective minimally invasive left sided colectomy for diverticular disease from January 2016 until December 2020 at our tertiary referral institution. RESULTS: In total, 83 patients (31 female and 52 male) with sigmoid diverticulitis underwent elective minimally invasive sigmoid colectomy, of which 42 underwent conventional laparoscopic surgery (LS) and 41 robotic assisted surgery (RS). The mean C-reactive protein difference between the preoperative and postoperative value was significantly lower in the robotic assisted group (4,03 mg/dL) than in the laparoscopic group (7.32 mg/dL) (p = 0.030). Similarly, the robotic´s hemoglobin difference was significantly lower (p = 0.039). The first postoperative bowel movement in the LS group occurred after a mean of 2.19 days, later than after a mean of 1.63 days in the RS group (p = 0.011). An overview of overall charge revealed significantly lower total costs per operation and postoperative hospital stay for the robotic approach, 6058 € vs. 6142 € (p = 0,014) not including the acquisition and maintenance costs for both systems. CONCLUSION: Robotic colon resection for diverticular disease is cost-effective and delivers reduced intraoperative trauma with significantly lower postoperative C-reactive protein and hemoglobin drift compared to conventional laparoscopy.

A retrospective cohort study of intra-corporeal versus extra-corporeal anastomosis for right hemicolectomy with cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to compare outcomes and cost effectiveness of extra-corporeal anastomosis (ECA) versus intra-corporeal anastomosis (ICA) for laparoscopic right hemicolectomy using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Programme data. METHODS: Patients who underwent elective laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for colon cancer from January 2018 to December 2022 were identified. Non-cancer diagnoses, emergency procedures or synchronous resection of other organs were excluded. Surgical characteristics, peri-operative outcomes, long-term survival and hospitalisation costs were compared. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used to evaluate cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: A total of 223 patients (175 ECA, 48 ICA) were included in the analysis. Both cohorts exhibited comparable baseline patient, comorbidity, and tumour characteristics. Distribution of pathological TMN stage, tumour largest dimension, total lymph node harvest and resection margin lengths were statistically similar. ICA was associated with a longer median operative duration compared with ECA (255 min vs. 220 min, P < 0.001). There was a quicker time to gastrointestinal recovery, with a shorter median hospital stay in the ICA group (4.0 versus 5.0 days, P = 0.001). Overall complication rates were comparable. ICA was associated with a higher surgical procedure cost (£6301.57 versus £4998.52, P < 0.001), but lower costs for ward accommodation (£1679.05 versus £2420.15, P = 0.001) and treatment (£3774.55 versus £4895.14, P = 0.009), with a 4.5% reduced overall cost compared with ECA. The ICER of -£3323.58 showed ICA to be more cost effective than ECA, across a range of willingness-to-pay thresholds. CONCLUSION: ICA in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy is associated with quicker post-operative recovery and may be more cost effective compared with ECA, despite increased operative costs.

Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer in Adults Aged 75 Years and Older: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample.

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted surgery has been increasingly adopted in colorectal cancer resection. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to compare the inpatient outcomes of robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection in patients aged 75 years and older. DESIGN: A retrospective, population-based study. SETTINGS: This study analyzed data from the United States Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2005 to 2018. PATIENTS: Patients with colorectal cancer aged 75 years and older and who underwent robot-assisted or conventional laparoscopic resection. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative complications, prolonged length of stay, and total hospital costs were assessed. RESULTS: Data from 14,108 patients were analyzed. After adjustment, any postoperative complications (adjusted OR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.77-0.99; p = 0.030) and prolonged length of stay (adjusted OR = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.67-0.91; p = 0.001) were significantly less in the robotic than the laparoscopic group. In addition, robotic surgery was associated with significantly higher total hospital costs (26.06 USD greater cost; 95% CI, 21.35-30.77 USD; p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: The analysis was limited by its retrospective and observational nature, potential coding errors, and the lack of intraoperative factors, such as operative time, laboratory measures, and information on surgeons' experience. CONCLUSIONS: In the United States, in patients with colorectal cancer aged 75 years and older who were undergoing tumor resections, compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery is associated with better inpatient outcomes in terms of complication rate and risk of prolonged length of stay. This finding is especially true among patients with colon cancer. However, robotic surgery is associated with higher total hospital costs. See Video Abstract . RESULTADOS DE LA CIRUGA ASISTIDA POR ROBOT FRENTE A LA CIRUGA LAPAROSCPICA PARA EL CNCER COLORRECTAL EN ADULTOS AOS DE EDAD UN ANLISIS EMPAREJADO POR PUNTUACIN DE PROPENSIN DE LA MUESTRA NACIONAL DE PACIENTES HOSPITALIZADOS DE ESTADOS UNIDOS: ANTECEDENTES:La cirugía asistida por robot se ha adoptado cada vez más en la resección del cáncer colorrectal.OBJETIVO:El estudio tuvo como objetivo comparar los resultados hospitalarios de la resección del cáncer colorrectal asistida por robot versus la laparoscópica convencional en pacientes ≥ 75 años.DISEÑO:Estudio retrospectivo de base poblacional.AJUSTES:Este estudio analizó datos de la Muestra Nacional de Pacientes Hospitalizados de Estados Unidos de 2005 a 2018.PACIENTES:Pacientes con cáncer colorrectal ≥ 75 años y sometidos a resección laparoscópica convencional o asistida por robot.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Se evaluaron las complicaciones posoperatorias, la duración prolongada de la estancia hospitalaria y los costos hospitalarios totales.RESULTADOS:Se analizaron datos de 14.108 pacientes. Después del ajuste, cualquier complicación posoperatoria (aOR = 0,87; IC del 95 %: 0,77-0,99, p = 0,030) y duración prolongada de la estancia hospitalaria (aOR = 0,78; IC del 95 %: 0,67-0,91, p = 0,001) fueron significativamente menores en el grupo robótico que el grupo laparoscópico. Además, la cirugía robótica se asoció con costos hospitalarios totales significativamente mayores ($26,06 USD mayor costo; IC 95%: 21,35-30,77 USD, p < 0,001).LIMITACIONES:El análisis estuvo limitado por su naturaleza retrospectiva y observacional, posibles errores de codificación y la falta de factores intraoperatorios como el tiempo operatorio, medidas de laboratorio e información sobre la experiencia de los cirujanos.CONCLUSIONES:En Estados Unidos, los pacientes con cáncer colorrectal ≥ 75 años que se sometieron a resecciones tumorales, en comparación con la cirugía laparoscópica convencional, la cirugía robótica se asocia con mejores resultados hospitalarios en términos de tasa de complicaciones y riesgo de estadía prolongada, especialmente entre pacientes con cáncer de colon. Sin embargo, la cirugía robótica se asocia a costes hospitalarios totales más elevados. (Traducción-Yesenia Rojas-Khalil ).

[Robotic vs. laparoscopic right hemicolectomy-An analysis of costs]. / Robotische vs. laparoskopische Hemikolektomie rechts ­ eine Kostenanalyse.

The use of robotic surgical methods for performing right-sided hemicolectomy has been somewhat controversial, primarily due to concerns related to costs. The purpose of this study is to document the initial robotic right hemicolectomies conducted at our institution and to compare them with a laparoscopic reference group. A significant focus of this study is the detailed analysis of the costs associated with both techniques within the German healthcare system.Surgical and cost-related data for 34 cases each for robotic and laparoscopic right-sided hemicolectomy performed at Nürnberg Hospital were compared. This comparison was conducted through a retrospective single-center case-matched analysis. Cost analysis was carried out following the current guidelines provided by the Institute for the Hospital Remuneration System (InEK) of Germany.The average age of the patient cohort was 70 years, with a male patient proportion of 57.4%. Analysis of perioperative parameters indicated similar outcomes for both surgical techniques. Regarding the incidence of complications of Clavien-Dindo stages III-V (8.8% vs. 17.6%; p = 0.48), a positive trend towards robotic surgery was observed. The cost analysis showed nearly identical total costs for the selected cases in both groups (mean €13,423 vs. €13,424; p = 1.00), with the most significant cost difference noted in surgical (operative) costs (€5,779 vs. €3,521; p < 0.01). The lower costs for laparoscopic cases were primarily due to the reduced material costs (mean €2,657 vs. €702; p < 0.05).In conclusion, both surgical approaches are clinically equivalent, with only minor differences in the total case costs.

Robotic versus laparoscopic anterior resection for the treatment of stage II and III sigmoid colon cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic anterior resection is a novel technique. However, evidence in the literature regarding the advantages of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RLS) is insufficient. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of RLS versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for the treatment of sigmoid colon cancer. We performed a retrospective study at the Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital. Patients diagnosed with sigmoid colon cancer and underwent anterior resection between January 2019 to September 2023 were included in the study. We compared the basic characteristics of the patients and the short-term and long-term outcomes of patients in the two groups. A total of 452 patients were included. Based on propensity score matching, 212 patients (RLS, n = 106; CLS, n = 106) were included. The baseline data in RLS group was comparable to that in CLS group. Compared with CLS group, RLS group exhibited less estimated blood loss (P = 0.015), more harvested lymph nodes (P = 0.005), longer operation time (P < 0.001) and higher total hospitalization costs (P < 0.001). Meanwhile, there were no significant differences in other perioperative or pathologic outcomes between the two groups. For 3-year prognosis, overall survival rates were 92.5% in the RLS group and 90.6% in the CLS group (HR 0.700, 95% CI 0.276-1.774, P = 0.452); disease-free survival rates were 91.5% in the RLS group and 87.7% in the CLS group (HR 0.613, 95% CI 0.262-1.435, P = 0.259). Compared with CLS, RLS for sigmoid colon cancer was found to be associated with a higher number of lymph nodes harvested, similar perioperative outcomes and long-term survival outcomes. High total hospitalization costs of RLS did not translate into better long-term oncology outcomes.

Costs in Colectomy Episodes of Care: Opportunities to Prevent Emergency Operations and Decrease Costs.

INTRODUCTION: Payment structured around Episodes of Care is a method for incentivizing decreased care utilization after major procedures. We examined Major Bowel Episodes of Care (MB-EoC)-the focus among general surgery procedures-within a large health system to determine the contribution of emergency bowel surgery to higher costs of care. METHODS: Adult MB-EoC cases from July 2018 to June 2021 were reviewed for 90-d costs, examining patient age, insurance, diagnosis, cost of care, and contributors to cost. For patients aged ≥45 y who had nonelective care for colon cancer, incidence of prior screening colonoscopy was examined. RESULTS: We identified 1292 colectomy cases. Mean age was 65 y. Of these patients, 90% had Medicare/commercial insurance. Colon cancer comprised 41% of primary diagnoses. Twenty-eight percent of cases were nonelective, more likely to have Medicaid/underinsured (21% versus 7%, P < 0.001), and had higher utilization of postdischarge cost-drivers. Ninety-day EoC per case cost was 66% higher for emergent versus elective cases. Of eligible emergency cancer cases, 43% (40/93) had undergone prior colonoscopy within 10 y. For patients with colon cancer, 90-d EoC per case was 39% higher for emergent versus elective cases. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency MB-EoC cases disproportionally contribute to higher 90-d care utilization and costs. Efforts to increase screening colonoscopy in appropriate populations may have a substantial impact on MB-EoC costs.

Utilization of minimally invasive colectomy at safety-net hospitals in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Prior literature has reported inferior surgical outcomes and reduced access to minimally invasive procedures at safety-net hospitals. However, this relationship has not yet been elucidated for elective colectomy. We sought to characterize the association between safety-net hospitals and likelihood of minimally invasive resection, perioperative outcomes, and costs. METHODS: All adult (≥18 years) hospitalization records entailing elective colectomy were identified in the 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample. Centers in the top quartile of safety-net burden were considered safety-net hospitals (others: non-safety-net hospitals). Multivariable regression models were developed to assess the impact of safety-net hospitals status on key outcomes. RESULTS: Of ∼532,640 patients, 95,570 (17.9%) were treated at safety-net hospitals. The safety-net hospitals cohort was younger and more often of Black race or Hispanic ethnicity. After adjustment, care at safety-net hospitals remained independently associated with reduced odds of minimally invasive surgery (adjusted odds ratio 0.92; 95% confidence interval 0.87-0.97). The interaction between safety-net hospital status and race was significant, such that Black race remained linked with lower odds of minimally invasive surgery at safety-net hospitals (reference: White race). Additionally, safety-net hospitals was associated with greater likelihood of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio 1.34, confidence interval 1.04-1.74) and any perioperative complication (adjusted odds ratio 1.15, confidence interval 1.08-1.22), as well as increased length of stay (ß+0.26 days, confidence interval 0.17-0.35) and costs (ß+$2,510, confidence interval 2,020-3,000). CONCLUSION: Care at safety-net hospitals was linked with lower odds of minimally invasive colectomy, as well as greater complications and costs. Black patients treated at safety-net hospitals demonstrated reduced likelihood of minimally invasive surgery, relative to White patients. Further investigation is needed to elucidate the root causes of these disparities in care.

Inflammatory bowel disease-associated colorectal cancer negatively affects surgery outcomes and health care costs.

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory bowel disease may affect the pathogenesis and clinicopathologic course of colorectal cancer. We sought to characterize the impact of inflammatory bowel disease on outcomes after colectomy and/or proctectomy for a malignant indication. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer as well as a pre-existing comorbid diagnosis of Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis between 2018 and 2021 were identified from Medicare claims data. The postoperative textbook outcome was defined as the absence of complications, as well as no extended hospital stay, 90-day readmission, or mortality. Postdischarge disposition and expenditures were also examined. RESULTS: Among 191,684 patients with colorectal cancer, 4,770 (2.5%) had a pre-existing diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease-associated colorectal cancer were less likely to undergo surgical resection (no inflammatory bowel disease: 47.6% vs inflammatory bowel disease: 42.1%; P < .001). Among patients who did undergo colorectal surgery, individuals with inflammatory bowel disease were less likely to achieve a textbook outcome (odds ratio 0.64 [95% confidence interval 0.58-0.70]). In particular, patients with inflammatory bowel disease had higher odds of postoperative complications (odds ratio 1.24 [1.12-1.38]), extended hospital stay (odds ratio 1.41 [1.27-1.58]), and readmission within 90 days (odds ratio 1.56 [1.42-1.72]) (all P < .05). Patients with inflammatory bowel disease-associated colorectal cancer were less likely to be discharged to their home under independent care (odds ratio 0.77 [0.68-0.87]) and had 12.2% higher expenditures, which correlated with whether the patient had a postoperative textbook outcome. CONCLUSION: One in 40 patients with colorectal cancer had concomitant inflammatory bowel disease. Inflammatory bowel disease was associated with a lower probability of achieving ideal postoperative outcomes, higher postdischarge expenditure, as well as worse long-term survival after colorectal cancer resection.

Same day discharge colon surgery: is it financially worth it?

AIM: Same day discharge (SDD) for colorectal surgery shows increasing promise in the era of enhanced recovery after surgery protocols and minimally invasive surgery. It has become increasingly relevant due to the constraints posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to compare SDD and postoperative day 1 (POD1) discharge to understand the clinical outcomes and financial impact on factors such as cost, charge, revenue, contribution margin and readmission. METHOD: A retrospective review of colectomies was performed at a single institution over a 2-year period (n = 143). Two populations were identified: SDD (n = 51) and POD1 (n = 92). Patients were selected by International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems-10 (ICD-10) and Diagnosis Related Grouper (DRG) codes. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference favouring SDD in total hospital cost (p < 0.0001), average direct costs (p < 0.0001) and average charges (p < 0.0016). SDD average hospital costs were $8699 (values in USD throughout) compared with $11 652 for POD 1 (p < 0.0001), and average SDD hospital charges were $85 506 compared with $97 008 for POD1 (p < 0.0016). The net revenue for SDD was $22 319 while for POD1 it was $26 173 (p = 0.14). Upon comparison of contribution margins (SDD $13 620 vs. POD1 $14 522), the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.73). There were no identified statistically significant differences in operating room time, robotic console time, readmission rates or surgical complications. CONCLUSIONS: Amidst the pandemic-related constraints, we found that SDD was associated with lower hospital costs and comparable contribution margins compared with POD1. Additionally, the study was unable to identify any significant difference between operating time, readmissions, and surgical complications when performing SDD.

Patience is key: Association of surgical timing with clinical outcomes in elderly patients with sigmoid volvulus.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines for sigmoid volvulus recommend endoscopy as a first line of treatment for decompression, followed by colectomy as early as possible. Timing of the latter varies greatly. This study compared early (≤2 days) versus delayed (>2 days) sigmoid colectomy. METHODS: 2016-2019 NRD database was queried to identify patients aged ≥65 years admitted for sigmoid volvulus who underwent sequential endoscopic decompression and sigmoid colectomy. Outcomes included mortality, complications, hospital length of stay, readmissions, and hospital costs. RESULTS: 842 patients were included, of which 409 (48.6 â€‹%) underwent delayed sigmoid colectomy. Delayed sigmoid colectomy was associated with reduced cardiac complications (1.1 â€‹% vs 0.0 â€‹%, p â€‹= â€‹0.045), reduced ostomy rate (38.3 â€‹% vs 29.4 â€‹%, p â€‹= â€‹0.013), an increased overall length of stay (12 days vs 8 days, p â€‹< â€‹0.001) and increased overall costs (27,764 dollar vs. 24,472 dollar, p â€‹< â€‹0.001). CONCLUSION: In geriatric patient with sigmoid volvulus, delayed surgical resection after decompression is associated with reduced cardiac complications and reduced ostomy rate, while increasing overall hospital length of stay and costs.

Clinical outcomes and cost comparison of laparoscopic versus open surgery in elderly colorectal cancer patients over 80 years.

PURPOSE: The growth of Singapore's geriatric population, coupled with the rise in colorectal cancer (CRC), has increased the number of colorectal surgeries performed on elderly patients. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and costs of laparoscopic versus open elective colorectal resections in elderly CRC patients over 80 years. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgery Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) identified patients over 80 years undergoing elective colectomy and proctectomy between 2018 and 2021. Patient demographics, length of stay (LOS), 30-day postoperative complications, and mortality rates were analysed. Cost data in Singapore dollars were obtained from the finance database. Univariate and multivariate regression models were used to determine cost drivers. The 5-year overall survival (OS) for the entire octogenarian CRC cohort with and without postoperative complications was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier curves. RESULTS: Of the 192 octogenarian CRC patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery between 2018 and 2021, 114 underwent laparoscopic resection (59.4%), while 78 underwent open surgery (40.6%). The proportion of proctectomy cases was similar between laparoscopic and open groups (24.6% vs. 23.1%, P = 0.949). Baseline characteristics, including Charlson Comorbidity Index, albumin level, and tumour staging, were comparable between both groups. Median operative duration was 52.5 min longer in the laparoscopic group (232.5 vs. 180.0 min, P < 0.001). Both groups had no significant differences in postoperative complications and 30-day and 1-year mortality rates. Median LOS was 6 days in the laparoscopic group compared to 9 days in the open group (P < 0.001). The mean total cost was 11.7% lower in the laparoscopic group (S$25,583.44 vs. S$28,970.85, P = 0.012). Proctectomy (P = 0.024), postoperative pneumonia (P < 0.001) and urinary tract infection (P < 0.001), and prolonged LOS > 6 days (P < 0.001) were factors contributing to increased costs in the entire cohort. The 5-year OS of octogenarians with minor or major postoperative complications was significantly lower than those without complications (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic resection is associated with significantly reduced overall hospitalization costs and decreased LOS compared to open resection among octogenarian CRC patients, with comparable postoperative outcomes and 30-day and 1-year mortality rates. The extended operative time and higher consumables costs from laparoscopic resection were mitigated by the decrease in other inpatient hospitalization costs, including ward accommodation, daily treatment fees, investigation costs, and rehabilitation expenditures. Comprehensive perioperative care and optimised surgical approach to mitigate the impact of postoperative complications can improve survival in elderly patients undergoing CRC resection.

The impact of operative approach on postoperative outcomes and healthcare utilization after colectomy.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate national trends in adoption of different surgical approaches for colectomy and compare clinical outcomes and resource utilization between approaches. METHODS: Retrospective study of patients aged ≥18 years who underwent elective inpatient left or right colectomy between 2010 and 2019 from the Premier Healthcare Database. Patients were classified by operative approach: open, minimally invasive: either laparoscopic or robotic. Postoperative outcomes assessed within index hospitalization include operating room time, hospital length of stay, rates of conversion to open surgery, reoperation, and complications. Post-discharge readmission, hospital-based encounters, and costs were collected to 30 days post-discharge. Multivariable regression models were used to compare outcomes between operative approaches adjusted for patient baseline characteristics and clustering within hospitals. RESULTS: Among 206,967 patients, the robotic approach rates increased from 2.1%/1.6% (2010) to 32.6%/26.8% (2019) for left/right colectomy, offset by a decrease in both open and laparoscopic approaches. Median length of stay for both left and right colectomies was significantly longer in open (6 days) and laparoscopic (5 days) compared to robotic surgery (4 days; all P values <.001). Robotic surgery compared to open and laparoscopic was associated with a significantly lower conversion rate, development of ileus, overall complications, and 30-day hospital encounters. Robotic surgery further demonstrated lower mortality, reoperations, postoperative bleeding, and readmission rates for left and right colectomies than open. Robotic surgery had significantly longer operating room times and higher costs than either open or laparoscopic. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic surgery is increasingly being used in colon surgery, with outcomes equivalent and in some domains superior to laparoscopic.

Evaluating the Validity of the Clavien-Dindo Classification in Colectomy Studies: A 90-Day Cost of Care Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The Clavien-Dindo classification is widely used to report postoperative morbidity but may underestimate the severity of colectomy complications. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess how well the Clavien-Dindo classification represents the severity of all grades of complications after colectomy using cost of care modeling. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients (N = 1807) undergoing elective colon or rectal resections without a stoma performed at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between 2009 and 2014 who were followed up for ≥90 days, were not transferred to other hospitals, and did not receive intraperitoneal chemotherapy were included in the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Complication severity was measured by the highest-grade complication per patient and attributable outpatient and inpatient costs. Associations were evaluated between patient complication grade and cost during 3 time periods: the 90 days after surgery, index admission, and postdischarge (<90 d). RESULTS: Of the 1807 patients (median age = 62 y), 779 (43%) had a complication; 80% of these patients had only grade 1 or 2 complications. Increasing patient complication grade correlated with 90-day cost, driven by inpatient cost differences (p < 0.001). For grade 1 and 2 patients, most costs were incurred after discharge and were the same between these grade categories. Among patients with a single complication (52%), there was no difference in index hospitalization, postdischarge, or total 90-day costs between grade 1 and 2 categories. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its retrospective design and generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: The Clavien-Dindo classification correlates well with 90-day costs, driven largely by inpatient resource use. Clavien-Dindo does not discriminate well among patients with low-grade complications in terms of their substantial postdischarge costs. These patients represent 80% of patients with a complication after colectomy. Examining the long-term burden associated with complications can help refine the Clavien-Dindo classification for use in colectomy studies. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B521. EVALUACIN DE LA VALIDEZ DE LA CLASIFICACIN DE CLAVIENDINDO EN ESTUDIOS DE COLECTOMA ANLISIS DEL COSTO DE LA ATENCIN EN DAS: ANTECEDENTES:La clasificación de Clavien-Dindo es utilizada ampliamante para conocer la morbilidad posoperatoria, pero puede subestimar la gravedad de las complicaciones de la colectomía.OBJETIVO:Evaluar que tan bien representa la clasificación de Clavien-Dindo la gravedad de todos los grados de complicaciones después de la colectomía utilizando un modelo de costo de la atención.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ENTORNO CLÍNICO:Centro oncológico integral.PACIENTES:Pacientes consecutivos (n = 1807) sometidos a resecciones electivas de colon o recto sin estoma realizadas en el Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center entre 2009 y 2014 que fueron seguidos durante ≥ 90 días, no fueron transferidos a otros hospitales y no recibieron quimioterapia intraperitoneal.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACION:Gravedad de la complicación medida por la complicación de mayor grado por paciente y los costos atribuibles para pacientes ambulatorios y hospitalizados. Se evaluó la asociación entre el grado de complicación del paciente y el costo durante 3 períodos de tiempo: posterior a la cirugía (hasta 90 días), a su ingreso y posterior al egreso (hasta 90 días).RESULTADOS:De los 1807 pacientes (mediana de edad de 62 años), 779 (43%) tuvieron una complicación; El 80% de estos pacientes tuvieron solo complicaciones de grado 1 o 2. El aumento del grado de complicación del paciente se correlacionó con el costo a 90 días, impulsado por las diferencias en el costo de los pacientes hospitalizados (p <0,001). Para los pacientes de grado 1 y 2, la mayoría de los costos se incurrieron después del alta y fueron los mismos entre ambas categorías. Entre los pacientes con una sola complicación (52%), no hubo diferencia en el índice de hospitalización, posterior al alta o en el costo total de 90 días entre las categorías de grado 1 y 2.LIMITACIONES:Diseño retrospectivo, generalizabilidad.CONCLUSIONES:La clasificación de Clavien-Dindo se correlaciona bien con los costos a 90 días, impulsados en gran parte por la utilización de recursos de pacientes hospitalizados. Clavien-Dindo no discrimina entre los pacientes con complicaciones de bajo grado en términos de sus costos sustanciales posterior al alta. Estos pacientes representan el 80% de los pacientes aquellos con una complicación tras la colectomía. Examinar la carga a largo plazo asociada a las complicaciones puede ayudar a mejorar la clasificación de Clavien-Dindo para su uso en estudios de colectomía. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B521.

Financial burden of postoperative complications following colonic resection: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Colonic resection is a common surgical procedure that is associated with a high rate of postoperative complications. Postoperative complications are expected to be major contributors to hospital costs. Therefore, this systematic review aims to outline the health costs of postoperative complications following colon resection surgery. METHODS: MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica database, Cochrane, and Economics literature medical databases were searched from 2010 to 2019 to identify English studies containing an economic evaluation of postoperative complications following colonic resection in adult patients. All surgical techniques and indications for colon resection were included. Eligible study designs included randomized trials, comparative observational studies, and conference abstracts. RESULTS: Thirty-four articles met the eligibility criteria. We found a high overall complication incidence with associated increased costs ranging from $2290 to $43,146. Surgical site infections and anastomotic leak were shown to be associated with greater resource utilization relative to other postoperative complications. Postoperative complications were associated with greater incidence of hospital readmission, which in turn is highlighted as a significant financial burden. Weak evidence demonstrates increased complication incidence and costlier complications with open colon surgery as compared to laparoscopic surgery. Notably, we identified a vast degree of heterogeneity in study design, complication reporting and costing methodology preventing quantitative analysis of cost results. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative complications in colonic resection appear to be associated with a significant financial burden. Therefore, large, prospective, cost-benefit clinical trials investigating preventative strategies, with detailed and consistent methodology and reporting standards, are required to improve patient outcomes and the cost-effectiveness of our health care systems.

Impact of Frailty on Clinical Outcomes and Hospitalization Costs Following Elective Colectomy.

BACKGROUND: Frailty has been increasingly recognized as a risk factor for inferior surgical outcomes and greater resource use. The present study evaluated the impact of a coding-based frailty tool on outcomes of elective colectomy in a national cohort. STUDY DESIGN: Adults undergoing elective colectomy were identified in the 2016-17 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Frailty was defined using the Johns Hopkins 10-domain coding-based binary tool. Generalized linear models were used to examine the association of frailty with in-hospital mortality, nonhome discharge, hospitalization duration (LOS), and inflation-adjusted costs. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and log-rank test was used to compare readmissions up to 1-year. RESULTS: Of 133 175 patients, 10.6% were considered frail. The most common resections were sigmoid (43.9%) and right (34.7%) while total colectomy was least common (2.8%). After adjustment, frailty was associated with greater odds of mortality (3.2, 95% CI 2.8-3.8) and nonhome discharge (6.0, 95% CI 5.5-6.4) as well as a $13,400-increment (95% CI 12,400-14,400) in costs and 4.4-day (95% CI 4.1-4.6) increase in LOS. Nonelective readmissions at 30 days were greater in frail than non-frail groups (14.7% vs. 10.4%, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Frailty is associated with inferior clinical outcomes and increased resource use following elective colectomy. Inclusion of frailty in risk models may facilitate risk stratification and shared decision-making.

Socioeconomic disparities in ostomy reversal among older adults with diverticulitis are more substantial among non-Hispanic Black patients.

BACKGROUND: While ostomies for diverticulitis are often intended to be temporary, ostomy reversal rates can be as low as 46%. There are few comprehensive studies evaluating the effects of socioeconomic status as a disparity in ostomy reversal. We hypothesized that among the elderly Medicare population undergoing partial colectomy for diverticulitis, lower socioeconomic status would be associated with reduced reversal rates. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using a 20% representative sample of Medicare beneficiaries >65 years old with diverticulitis who received ostomies between January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2017. We evaluated the effect of neighborhood socioeconomic status, measured by the Social Deprivation Index, on ostomy reversal within 1 year. Secondary outcomes were complications and mortality. RESULTS: Of 10,572 patients, ostomy reversals ranged from 21.2% (low socioeconomic status) to 29.8% (highest socioeconomic status), with a shorter time to reversal among higher socioeconomic status groups. Patients with low socioeconomic status were less likely to have their ostomies reversed, compared with the highest socioeconomic status group (hazard ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.74-0.93) and were more likely to die (hazard ratio 1.21, 95% confidence interval 1.10-1.33). When stratified by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status, non-Hispanic White patients at every socioeconomic status had a higher reversal rate than non-Hispanic Black patients (White patients 32.0%-24.8% vs Black patients 19.6%-14.7%). Socioeconomic status appeared to have a higher relative impact among non-Hispanic Black patients. CONCLUSION: Among Medicare diverticulitis patients, ostomy reversal rates are low. Patients with lower socioeconomic status are less likely to undergo stoma reversal and are more likely to die; Black patients are least likely to have an ostomy reversal.

Patient Factors Limit Colon Cancer Survival at Safety-Net Hospitals: A National Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Safety-net hospitals serve a vital role in society by providing care for vulnerable populations. Existing data regarding oncologic outcomes of patients with colon cancer treated at safety-net hospitals are limited and variable. The objective of this study was to delineate disparities in treatment and outcomes for patients with colon cancer treated at safety-net hospitals. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study identified 802,304 adult patients with colon adenocarcinoma from the National Cancer Database between 2004-2016. Patients were stratified according to safety-net burden of the treating hospital as previously described. Patient, tumor, facility, and treatment characteristics were compared between groups as were operative and short-term outcomes. Cox proportional hazards regression was utilized to compare overall survival between patients treated at high, medium, and low burden hospitals. RESULTS: Patients treated at safety-net hospitals were demographically distinct and presented with more advanced disease. They were also less likely to receive surgery, adjuvant chemotherapy, negative resection margins, adequate lymphadenectomy, or a minimally invasive operative approach. On multivariate analysis adjusting for patient and tumor characteristics, survival was inferior for patients at safety-net hospitals, even for those with stage 0 (in situ) disease. CONCLUSION: This analysis revealed inferior survival for patients with colon cancer treated at safety-net hospitals, including those without invasive cancer. These findings suggest that unmeasured population differences may confound analyses and affect survival more than provider or treatment disparities.