Safety and feasibility of prolonged versus early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: a single-center retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the standard treatment for acute cholecystitis (AC), and it should be performed within 72 h of symptoms onset if possible. In many undesired situations, LC was performed beyond the golden 72 h. However, the safety and feasibility of prolonged LC (i.e., performed more than 72 h after symptoms onset) are largely unknown, and therefore were investigated in this study. METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled the adult patients who were diagnosed as AC and were treated with LC at the same admission between January 2015 and October 2018 in an emergency department of a tertiary academic medical center in China. The primary outcome was the rate and severity of adverse events, while the secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay and costs. RESULTS: Among the 104 qualified patients, 70 (67.3%) underwent prolonged LC and 34 (32.7%) underwent early LC (< 72 h of symptom onset). There were no differences between the two groups in mortality rate (none for both), conversion rates (prolonged LC 5.4%, and early LC 8.8%, P = 0.68), intraoperative and postoperative complications (prolonged LC 5.7% and early LC 2.9%, P ≥ 0.99), operation time (prolonged LC 193.5 min and early LC 198.0 min, P = 0.81), and operation costs (prolonged LC 8,700 Yuan, and early LC 8,500 Yuan, P = 0.86). However, the prolonged LC was associated with longer postoperative hospitalization (7.0 days versus 6.0 days, P = 0.03), longer total hospital stay (11.0 days versus 8.0 days, P < 0.01), and subsequently higher total costs (40,400 Yuan versus 31,100 Yuan, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged LC is safe and feasible for patients with AC for having similar rates and severity of adverse events as early LC, but it is also associated with longer hospital stay and subsequently higher total cost.

Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage for Acute Cholecystitis.

The mainstay of management of acute cholecystitis has been surgical, with percutaneous gallbladder drainage in patients deemed high risk for surgical intervention. Endoscopic management of acute cholecytitis with transpapillary and transmural drainage of the gall bladder is emerging as a viable alternative in high-risk surgical patients. In this article, we discuss the background, current status, technical challenges and strategies to overcome them, adverse events, and outcomes of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for management of acute cholecystitis.

Cost effectiveness of endoscopic gallbladder drainage to treat acute cholecystitis in poor surgical candidates.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic gallbladder drainage (GBD) is an alternative to percutaneous GBD (PGBD) to treat acute cholecystitis, yielding similar success rates and fewer adverse events. To our knowledge, no cost-effectiveness analysis has compared these procedures. We performed an economic analysis to identify clinical and cost determinants of three treatment options for acute cholecystitis in poor surgical candidates. METHODS: We compared three treatment strategies: PGBD, endoscopic retrograde cholangiographic transpapillary drainage (ERC-GBD), and endosonographic GBD (EUS-GBD). A decision tree was created over a 3-month period. Effectiveness was measured using hospital length of stay, including adverse events and readmissions. Costs of care were calculated from the National Inpatient Sample. Technical and clinical success estimates were obtained from the published literature. Cost effectiveness was measured as incremental cost effectiveness and compared to the national average cost of one hospital bed per diem. RESULTS: Analysis of a hypothetical cohort of poor candidates for cholecystectomy showed that, compared to PGBD, ERC-GBD was a cost-saving strategy and EUS-GBD was cost effective, requiring $1312 per hospitalization day averted. Additional costs of endoscopic interventions were less than the average cost of one hospital bed per diem. Compared to ERC-GBD, EUS-GBD required expending an additional $8950 to prevent one additional day of hospitalization. Our model was considerably affected by lumen-apposing metal stent cost and hospital length of stay for patients managed conservatively and those requiring delayed surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic GBD is cost effective compared to PGBD, favoring ERC-GBD over EUS-GBD. Further efforts are needed to make endoscopic GBD available in more medical centers, reduce equipment costs, and shorten inpatient stay.

Managing acute cholecystitis among Medicaid insured in New York State: opportunities to optimize care.

BACKGROUND: Identifying sources of unnecessary cost within Medicaid will help focus cost containment efforts. This study sought to identify differences in surgical management and associated costs of cholecystitis between Medicaid and privately insured in New York State. METHODS: The New York State all-payer mandatory discharge database from 2003 to 2013, had 297,635 patients with Medicaid (75,512) and privately (222,123) insurance who underwent cholecystectomy for cholecystitis. Patients were stratified by insurance. Four surgical management approaches were delineated based on cholecystectomy timing: primary, interval, emergency, and delayed cholecystectomy. Delayed cholecystectomy was defined as more than one hospital visit from diagnosis to definitive cholecystectomy. Medicaid and privately insured patients were propensity score matched. Surgical management approach and associated costs were compared between matched cohorts. RESULTS: A greater proportion of Medicaid patients underwent delayed cholecystectomy compared to matched privately insured patients, 8.5 versus 4.8%; P < 0.001. Primary initial cholecystectomy was performed in fewer Medicaid compared to privately insured patients, 55.4 versus 66.0%, P < 0.001. Primary initial cholecystectomy was the cheapest surgical management approach, with the median cost of $3707, and delayed cholecystectomy was the most expensive, $12,212, P < 0.001. The median cost per Medicaid patient was $6170 versus $4804 per matched privately insured patient, P < 0.001. The annual predicted cost savings for New York State Medicaid would be $13,097,371, if the distribution of surgical management approaches were proportionally similar to private insurance. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid patients with cholecystitis were more frequently managed with delayed cholecystectomy than privately insured patients, which had substantial cost implications for the New York Medicaid Program.

Cost-effectiveness of emergency versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute gallbladder pathology.

BACKGROUND: The optimal timing of cholecystectomy for patients admitted with acute gallbladder pathology is unclear. Some studies have shown that emergency cholecystectomy during the index admission can reduce length of hospital stay with similar rates of conversion to open surgery, complications and mortality compared with a 'delayed' operation following discharge. Others have reported that cholecystectomy during the index acute admission results in higher morbidity, extended length of stay and increased costs. This study examined the cost-effectiveness of emergency versus delayed cholecystectomy for acute benign gallbladder disease. METHODS: Using data from a prospective population-based cohort study examining the outcomes of cholecystectomy in the UK and Ireland, a model-based cost-utility analysis was conducted from the perspective of the UK National Health Service, with a 1-year time horizon for costs and outcomes. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to investigate the impact of parameter uncertainty on the results obtained from the model. RESULTS: Emergency cholecystectomy was found to be less costly (£4570 versus £4720; €5484 versus €5664) and more effective (0·8868 versus 0·8662 QALYs) than delayed cholecystectomy. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the emergency strategy is more than 60 per cent likely to be cost-effective across willingness-to-pay values for the QALY from £0 to £100 000 (€0-120 000). CONCLUSION: Emergency cholecystectomy is less costly and more effective than delayed cholecystectomy. This approach is likely to be beneficial to patients in terms of improved health outcomes and to the healthcare provider owing to the reduced costs.

Impact of medical or surgical admission on outcomes of patients with acute cholecystitis.

BACKGROUND: Although acute cholecystitis (AC) is a surgical disease, patients with the condition may be admitted to medical-related services (MS). This may lead to delayed cholecystectomy thereby affecting outcomes and quality of care. METHODS: Between July 2010 and March 2013, 329 patients under 70 years old presented to a community-based tertiary care hospital with AC and underwent same admission cholecystectomy. Outcomes were compared between patients admitted to MS and surgical services (SS). RESULTS: Two hundred fifteen patients (65.3%) were admitted to a MS. Patients under the MS had longer LOS (3.0 days vs. 2.0 days, p < 0.001), waiting time to surgical consultation (7.3 h vs. 5.0 h, p < 0.001) and to cholecystectomy (1.0, 0-2 days vs. 1.0, 0-1 day, p < 0.001), and increased hospital costs ($3685 vs. $4,688, p < 0.001) compared to the SS. Readmission and mortality rates were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSION: Patients under 70 years old with AC undergoing cholecystectomy admitted to MS had increased LOS, delay to the operation, and hospital costs compared to those admitted to a SS. Admission of patients with AC to a SS needs to be emphasized to reduce costs and improve quality of care.

Cost Effectiveness of a Fast-Track Protocol for Urgent Laparoscopic Cholecystectomies and Appendectomies.

BACKGROUND: Fast-track protocols (FTPs) are used to decrease length of stay (LOS) and hospital costs for elective outpatient procedures. Few institutions have implemented FTP for urgent procedures such as laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective single-institution cohort study including all patients undergoing urgent LC or LA between July 1, 2010 and May 1, 2013. Exclusion criteria included conversion to open procedure, perforated appendicitis, or procedure related to intra-abdominal injury. Analysis included a comparison of the three study groups: (1) before (PRE) and after (POST) implementation of the fast-track protocol (FTP), (2) fast-track cohort (FT) and non-fast-track cohort (NFT), and (3) those completing the fast-track pathway (FT-C) and those who began but failed to complete the pathway (FT-F). RESULTS: There were significant reductions in LOS between all study groups compared: between PRE (n = 256) and POST (n = 472) cohorts by half a day (2.0 vs. 1.5 days, p < 0.02); between FT and NFT (0.68 vs. 1.82 days, p < 0.01); and FT-C and FT-F (0.49 vs. 1.05 days, p < 0.01). Total hospital charges were significantly reduced in FT compared with NFT ($22,347 vs. $30,868, p < 0.01) with an average savings of $8521. Total hospital charges were decreased in the FT-C compared with FT-F cohorts ($21,971 vs. $22,939, p = 0.3) with an average savings of $968. Readmissions, complications, and satisfaction were similar for all comparison groups. CONCLUSIONS: FTPs for urgent appendectomies and cholecystectomies can significantly reduce hospital costs by reducing LOS without compromising patient outcomes.

Could the Tokyo guidelines on the management of acute cholecystitis be adopted in developing countries? Experience of one center.

PURPOSE: The Tokyo guidelines for diagnostic criteria and severity assessment of acute cholecystitis (AC), published in 2007, recommend early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC) be done as soon as possible after the onset of symptoms. We conducted this study to analyze the changes in the therapeutic strategy for AC in a surgical center in Tunisia after the Tokyo guidelines were published. METHODS: Between January, 2005 and January, 2013, 649 patients underwent cholecystectomy for AC at the Department of Surgery, Mohamed Tahar Maamouri Hospital in Nabeul, Tunisia. The study period was subdivided into before (n = 192) and after (n = 457) the publication of the Tokyo guidelines, that is, prior to and including 2007, and from 2008 onward, respectively. We reviewed patient records retrospectively to collect demographic data, biochemical data, radiological findings, and postoperative outcomes. All these factors were compared between the groups. RESULTS: The duration of symptoms before surgery was significantly longer before 2008 (p = 0.018). ELC was significantly more frequent after 2008 (p = 0.001). Laparoscopic surgery was converted to open surgery in 16.1 % of patients before 2008 vs. 7.8 % of patients after 2008 (p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in bile duct injury or postoperative complications between the groups. The length of preoperative, postoperative, and total hospital stay was longer before 2008. CONCLUSIONS: ELC is a safe and effective therapeutic strategy for AC. The Tokyo guidelines resulted in a significant increase in the number of ELCs being performed and significantly reduced preoperative and total hospital stay without increasing intra- and postoperative complications. Importantly, ELC reduced medical costs, which is crucial for a country with limited resources, such as Tunisia.

[Optimal timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in treatment of acute cholecystitis]. / Optimálne nacasovanie laparoskopickej cholecystektómie v liecbe akútnej cholecystitídy.

INTRODUCTION: Acute cholecystitis is one of the most frequent diseases occurring in developed countries of the world. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a treatment option for acute cholecystitis. Since the advent of laparoscopic cholecystectomy there has been a lack of agreement regarding the timing of the operation in the treatment of acute cholecystitis. METHOD: From September 2012 to August 2015 we carried out a prospective randomized trial at the IIIrd Surgical Department of University Hospital Milosrdní bratia in Bratislava. We compared two basic approaches to the treatment of acute cholecystitis. During the trial, 64 patients with acute cholecystitis were admitted to the surgery department. 32 patients were treated with early laparoscopic cholecystectomy within 72 hours from the appearance of the symptoms. The other 32 patients were primarily treated with antibiotics and subsequently underwent delayed cholecystectomy after 68 weeks. RESULTS: Our results suggest several advantages of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy such as shorter operation time, lower conversion rate, shorter length of hospital stay, shorter postoperative convalescence and lower cost of hospitalisation. CONCLUSION: Based on these results we believe that immediate laparoscopic cholecystectomy (within 24 hours from the patients admission to hospital) should become a preferred method of treatment of patients with acute cholecystitis. KEY WORDS: acute cholecystectomy early and delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy prospective randomized trial.

Influence of Health Insurance Expansion on Disparities in the Treatment of Acute Cholecystitis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of the 2006 Massachusetts (MA) health reform on disparities in the management of acute cholecystitis (AC). BACKGROUND: Immediate cholecystectomy has been shown to be the optimal treatment for AC, yet variation in care persists depending upon insurance status and patient race. How increased insurance coverage impacts these disparities in surgical care is not known. METHODS: A cohort study of patients admitted with AC in MA and 3 control states from 2001 through 2009 was performed using the Hospital Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Databases. We examined all nonelderly white, black, or Latino patients by insurance type and patient race, evaluating changes in the probability of undergoing immediate cholecystectomy and disparities in receiving immediate cholecystectomy before and after Massachusetts health reform. RESULTS: Data from 141,344 patients hospitalized for AC were analyzed. Before the 2006 reform, government-subsidized/self-pay (GS/SP) patients had a 6.6 to 9.9 percentage-point lower (P < 0.001) probability of immediate cholecystectomy in both MA control states. The MA insurance expansion was independently associated with a 2.5 percentage-point increased probability of immediate cholecystectomy for all GS/SP patients in MA (P = 0.049) and a 5.0 percentage-point increased probability (P = 0.011) for nonwhite, GS/SP patients compared to control states. Racial disparities in the probability of immediate cholecystectomy seen before health care reform were no longer statistically significant after reform in MA while persisting in control states. CONCLUSIONS: The MA health reform was associated with increased probability of undergoing immediate cholecystectomy for AC and reduced disparities in undergoing cholecystectomy by insurance status and patient race.

Meta-analysis comparing early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies comparing early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC) with delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (DLC) for acute cholecystitis were incomplete. A meta-analysis was undertaken to compare the cost-effectiveness, quality of life, safety and effectiveness of ELC versus DLC. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared ELC (performed within 7 days of symptom onset) with DLC (undertaken at least 1 week after symptoms had subsided) for acute cholecystitis. RESULTS: Sixteen studies reporting on 15 RCTs comprising 1625 patients were included. Compared with DLC, ELC was associated with lower hospital costs, fewer work days lost (mean difference (MD) -11·07 (95 per cent c.i. -16·21 to -5·94) days; P < 0·001), higher patient satisfaction and quality of life, lower risk of wound infection (relative risk 0·65, 95 per cent c.i. 0·47 to 0·91; P = 0·01) and shorter hospital stay (MD -3·38 (-4·23 to -2·52) days; P < 0·001), but a longer duration of operation (MD 11·12 (4·57 to 17·67) min; P < 0·001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in mortality, bile duct injury, bile leakage, conversion to open cholecystectomy or overall complications. CONCLUSION: For patients with acute cholecystitis, ELC appears as safe and effective as DLC. ELC might be associated with lower hospital costs, fewer work days lost, and greater patient satisfaction.

[TREATMENT OF ACUTE CALCULOUS CHOLECYSTITIS: "EARLY" OR "PLANNED" LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTMIVY].

The comparative analysis of results of surgical treatment of 82 patients with acute cholecystitis, which made "early" (ELCE) or "planned" (PLCE) laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCE) in the surgical department for the period from 2012 to 2014. The analysis showed that LCE can be set in any time from the beginning of acute cholecystitis. However, priority should be given ELCE, providing significant reduction in duration of treatment of patients in hospitals and is more cost effective.

Acute cholecystitis: early versus delayed cholecystectomy, a multicenter randomized trial (ACDC study, NCT00447304).

OBJECTIVE: Acute cholecystitis is a common disease, and laparoscopic surgery is the standard of care. BACKGROUND: Optimal timing of surgery for acute cholecystitis remains controversial: either early surgery shortly after hospital admission or delayed elective surgery after a conservative treatment with antibiotics. METHODS: The ACDC ("Acute Cholecystitis-early laparoscopic surgery versus antibiotic therapy and Delayed elective Cholecystectomy") study is a randomized, prospective, open-label, parallel group trial. Patients were randomly assigned to receive immediate surgery within 24 hours of hospital admission (group ILC) or initial antibiotic treatment, followed by delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy at days 7 to 45 (group DLC). For infection, all patients were treated with moxifloxacin for at least 48 hours. Primary endpoint was occurrence of predefined relevant morbidity within 75 days. Secondary endpoints were as follows: (1) 75-day morbidity using a scoring system; (2) conversion rate; (3) change of antibiotic therapy; (4) mortality; (5) costs; and (6) length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Morbidity rate was significantly lower in group ILC (304 patients) than in group DLC (314 patients): 11.8% versus 34.4%. Conversion rate to open surgery and mortality did not differ significantly between groups. Mean length of hospital stay (5.4 days vs 10.0 days; P < 0.001) and total hospital costs (€2919 vs €4262; P < 0.001) were significantly lower in group ILC. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, randomized trial, laparoscopic cholecystectomy within 24 hours of hospital admission was shown to be superior to the conservative approach concerning morbidity and costs. Therefore, we believe that immediate laparoscopic cholecystectomy should become therapy of choice for acute cholecystitis in operable patients. (NCT00447304).

Cost utility of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.

BACKGROUND: Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis is safe and effective. However, the potential cost savings of this management strategy have not been well studied in a North American context. This study aimed to estimate the cost effectiveness of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Canada. METHODS: A decision analytic model estimating and comparing costs from a Canadian providing institution after either early or delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy was used. The health care resources consumed were calculated using local hospital data, and outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained during 1 year. Uncertainty was investigated with one-way sensitivity analyses, varying the probabilities of the events and utilities. RESULTS: Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy was estimated to cost approximately $2,000 (Canadian dollars) less than delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy per patient, with an incremental gain of approximately 0.03 QALYs. Sensitivity analysis showed that only extreme values of bile duct injury or bile leak altered the direction of incremental gain. CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of a policy in favor of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy will result in better patient quality of life and substantial savings to the Canadian health care system.

Impact of accountable care organizations on acute cholecystitis outcomes in the Rio Grande Valley.

BACKGROUND: Accountable care organizations through the Affordable Care Act are to improve Medicare beneficiaries' health while reducing costs. We hypothesize that this model may shift care, disease burden, and costs to nonaffiliated hospital facilities in patients with acute cholecystitis. METHODS: A retrospective difference-in-differences analysis was performed to compare severity, postoperative complications, diagnostic modality, length of stay, and costs in patients with acute cholecystitis from a post-accountable care organization implementation period (January 2014 through December 2015) to a pre-accountable care organization period (January 2011 through December 2012). RESULTS: Analysis of 400 patients with acute cholecystitis revealed the post-accountable care organization patients had significantly (P < .0001) higher disease severity (14.4% vs 8.4%), emergency admissions (90.1 vs 74.2%), computed tomography scans (55.5% vs 27.8%), prolonged length of stay (5.2 vs 3.9 days), and a 30% (P < .0003) increase in total costs. CONCLUSION: These data are consistent with the hypothesis that the introduction of accountable care organizations resulted in a higher morbidity, more emergency admissions, more extensive management, a prolonged length of stay, and increased cost in patients with acute cholecystitis. These data support the position that accountable care organizations may shift costs from the primary care setting to nonaffiliated accountable care organization hospitals, provide a lesser level of care, and thus potentially failing their primary mandates.

Cost-utility and value-of-information analysis of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.

BACKGROUND: : A recent systematic review found early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC) to be safe and to shorten total hospital stay compared with delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (DLC) for acute cholecystitis. The cost-effectiveness of ELC versus DLC for acute cholecystitis is unknown. METHODS: : A decision tree model estimating and comparing costs to the UK National Health Service (NHS) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained following a policy of either ELC or DLC was developed with a time horizon of 1 year. Uncertainty was investigated with probabilistic sensitivity analysis, and value-of-information analysis estimated the likely return from further investment in research in this area. RESULTS: : ELC is less costly (approximately - pound820 per patient) and results in better quality of life (+0.05 QALYs per patient) than DLC. Given a willingness-to-pay threshold of pound20 000 per QALY gained, there is a 70.9 per cent probability that ELC is cost effective compared with DLC. Full implementation of ELC could save the NHS pound8.5 million per annum. CONCLUSION: : The results of this decision analytic modelling study suggest that on average ELC is less expensive and results in better quality of life than DLC. Future research should focus on quality-of-life measures alone.

Early vs. Delayed Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Acute Cholecystitis - Single Center Experience.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is now considered the procedure of choice that achieves a shorter recovery period after the surgery and reduction in the cost of treatment. Aim: The aim of the study is to prove which method: early or delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the method of choice in the treatment of acute cholecystitis by examining: duration of hospitalization, conversion rate, duration of surgery, postoperative complications, and total cost. METHODS: The study was conducted at the University Clinical Center of Republika Srpska as a retrospective-prospective study from May 1st 2013 until December 31st 2019. Patients diagnosed with acute cholecystitis were divided into two groups: Patients designated for early laparoscopic cholecystectomy within 72 hours of admission (group A-42 patients), Patients designated for initial conservative treatment followed by a delayed interval of 6-12 weeks until surgery (group B-42 patients). RESULTS: In both groups, there were statistically significantly more female respondents. The results showed that the average cost of treatment in the early treated group was statistically significantly lower than the cost of treatment in the delayed treatment group. The patients in the early group had shorter hospitalization times (an average of 2.8 days and 5.6 days in the delayed group of patients), a smaller percentage of conversions (4.8% in the early and 16.7 in the delayed group of patients), the total cost of in the early group it was 1300.83 KM, while in the delayed group it was 1645.43 KM. CONCLUSION: Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a method to be preferred in surgical treatment.

Prospective randomized trial using cost-utility analysis of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute gallbladder disease.

BACKGROUND: This randomized controlled trial compared the cost-utility of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy with that for conventional management of newly diagnosed acute gallbladder disease. METHODS: Adults admitted to hospital with a first episode of biliary colic or acute cholecystitis were randomized to an early intervention group (36 patients, operation within 72 h of admission) or a conventional group (36, elective cholecystectomy 3 months later). Costs were measured from a National Health Service and societal perspective. Quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains were calculated 1 month after surgery. RESULTS: The mean(s.d.) total costs of care were pound 5911(2445) for the early group and pound 6132(3244) for the conventional group (P = 0.928), Mean(s.d.) societal costs were pound 1322(1402) and pound 1461(1532) for the early and conventional groups respectively (P = 0.732). Visual analogue scale scores of health were 72.94 versus 84.63 (P = 0.012) and the mean(s.d.) QALY gain was 0.85(0.26) versus 0.93(0.13) respectively (P = 0.262). The incremental cost per additional QALY gained favoured conventional management at a cost of pound 3810 per QALY gained. CONCLUSION: In this pragmatic trial, the cost-utilities of both the early and conventional approaches were similar, but the incremental cost per additional QALY gained favoured conventional management.

A propensity score matched comparison of readmissions and cost of laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs percutaneous cholecystostomy for acute cholecystitis.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) is an initial alternative to laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for complicated acute cholecystitis (AC). No studies have directly compared costs of index hospitalization and readmissions between PC and LC patients. METHODS: The Nationwide Readmissions Database was queried for patients undergoing PC or LC for AC from 2013 through 2014. Primary outcomes including length of stay, and index and total hospital costs at 30- and 60-days were evaluated after 1:1 propensity score matching for patient and hospital characteristics. RESULTS: PC patients had increased index hospital length of stay: 6 days vs 5 days (p < 0.01). Index admission cost was cheaper for PC ($12,839 vs $13,345, p = 0.028). Total cost, including readmissions, was significantly increased in PC patients: 30-days (LC: $13,947, PC: $14,592, p = 0.029) and 60-days (LC: $14,280, PC: $16,518, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: PC patients were more frequently readmitted, had longer hospital stays, and increased hospital costs compared to those undergoing LC.

Meta-analysis of the cost-effectiveness of early versus delayed cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.

Background: Acute calculous cholecystitis (ACC) is a common disease across the world and is associated with significant socioeconomic costs. Although contemporary guidelines support the role of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC), there is significant variation among units adopting it as standard practice. There are many resource implications of providing a service whereby cholecystectomies for acute cholecystitis can be performed safely. Methods: Studies that incorporated an economic analysis comparing early with delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (DLC) for acute cholecystitis were identified by means of a systematic review. A meta-analysis was performed on those cost evaluations. The quality of economic valuations contained therein was evaluated using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) analysis score. Results: Six studies containing cost analyses were included in the meta-analysis with 1128 patients. The median healthcare cost of ELC versus DLC was €4400 and €6004 respectively. Five studies had adequate data for pooled analysis. The standardized mean difference between ELC and DLC was -2·18 (95 per cent c.i. -3·86 to -0·51; P = 0·011; I 2 = 98·7 per cent) in favour of ELC. The median QHES score for the included studies was 52·17 (range 41-72), indicating overall poor-to-fair quality. Conclusion: Economic evaluations within clinical trials favour ELC for ACC. The limited number and poor quality of economic evaluations are noteworthy.