Impact of Early Cholecystectomy on the Cost of Treating Mild Gallstone Pancreatitis: Gallstone PANC Trial.

BACKGROUND: The Gallstone Pancreatitis: Admission vs Normal Cholecystectomy (Gallstone PANC) Trial demonstrated that cholecystectomy within 24 hours of admission (early) compared with after clinical resolution (control) for mild gallstone pancreatitis, significantly reduced 30-day length-of-stay (LOS) without increasing major postoperative complications. We assessed whether early cholecystectomy decreased 90-day healthcare use and costs. STUDY DESIGN: A secondary economic evaluation of the Gallstone PANC Trial was performed from the healthcare system perspective. Costs for index admissions and all gallstone pancreatitis-related care 90 days post-discharge were obtained from the hospital accounting system and inflated to 2020 USD. Negative binomial regression models and generalized linear models with log-link and gamma distribution, adjusting for randomization strata, were used. Bayesian analysis with neutral prior was used to estimate the probability of cost reduction with early cholecystectomy. RESULTS: Of 98 randomized patients, 97 were included in the analyses. Baseline characteristics were similar in early (n = 49) and control (n = 48) groups. Early cholecystectomy resulted in a mean absolute difference in LOS of -0.96 days (95% CI, -1.91 to 0.00, p = 0.05). Ninety-day mean total costs were $14,974 (early) vs $16,190 (control) (cost ratio [CR], 0.92; 95% CI, 0.73-1.15, p = 0.47), with a mean absolute difference of $1,216 less (95% CI, -$4,782 to $2,349, p = 0.50) per patient in the early group. On Bayesian analysis, there was an 81% posterior probability that early cholecystectomy reduced 90-day total costs. CONCLUSION: In this single-center trial, early cholecystectomy for mild gallstone pancreatitis reduced 90-day LOS and had an 81% probability of reducing 90-day healthcare system costs.

Robotic versus laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: multicenter, blinded randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether robotic ventral hernia repair is associated with fewer days in the hospital 90 days after surgery compared with laparoscopic repair. DESIGN: Pragmatic, blinded randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Multidisciplinary hernia clinics in Houston, USA. PARTICIPANTS: 124 patients, deemed appropriate candidates for elective minimally invasive ventral hernia repair, consecutively presenting from April 2018 to February 2019. INTERVENTIONS: Robotic ventral hernia repair (n=65) versus laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (n=59). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was number of days in hospital within 90 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes included emergency department visits, operating room time, wound complications, hernia recurrence, reoperation, abdominal wall quality of life, and costs from the healthcare system perspective. Outcomes were pre-specified before data collection began and analyzed as intention to treat. RESULTS: Patients from both groups were similar at baseline. Ninety day follow-up was completed in 123 (99%) patients. No evidence was seen of a difference in days in hospital between the two groups (median 0 v 0 days; relative rate 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.37 to 2.19; P=0.82). For secondary outcomes, no differences were noted in emergency department visits, wound complications, hernia recurrence, or reoperation. However, robotic repair had longer operative duration (141 v 77 min; mean difference 62.89, 45.75 to 80.01; P≤0.001) and increased healthcare costs ($15 865 (£12 746; €14 125) v $12 955; cost ratio 1.21, 1.07 to 1.38; adjusted absolute cost difference $2767, $910 to $4626; P=0.004). Among patients with robotic ventral hernia repair, two had an enterotomy compared none with laparoscopic repair. The median one month postoperative improvement in abdominal wall quality of life was 3 with robotic ventral hernia repair compared with 15 following laparoscopic repair. CONCLUSION: This study found no evidence of a difference in 90 day postoperative hospital days between robotic and laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. However, robotic repair increased operative duration and healthcare costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03490266.

National mandatory motorcycle helmet laws may save $2.2 billion annually: An inpatient and value of statistical life analysis.

BACKGROUND: While statistics exist regarding the overall rate of fatalities in motorcyclists with and without helmets, a combined inpatient and value of statistical life (VSL) analysis has not previously been reported. METHODS: Statistical data of motorcycle collisions were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control, National Highway Transportation Safety Board, and Governors Highway Safety Association. The VSL estimate was obtained from the 2002 Department of Transportation calculation. Statistics on helmeted versus nonhelmeted motorcyclists, death at the scene, and inpatient death were obtained using the 2010 National Trauma Data Bank. Inpatient costs were obtained from the 2010 National Inpatient Sample. Population estimates were generated using weighted samples, and all costs are reported using 2010 US dollars using the Consumer Price Index. RESULTS: A total of 3,951 fatal motorcycle collisions were reported in 2010, of which 77% of patients died at the scene, 10% in the emergency department, and 13% as inpatients. Thirty-seven percent of all riders did not wear a helmet but accounted for 69% of all deaths. Of those motorcyclists who survived to the hospital, the odds ratio of surviving with a helmet was 1.51 compared with those without a helmet (p < 0.001). Total costs for nonhelmeted motorcyclists were 66% greater at $5.5 billion, compared with $3.3 billion for helmeted motorcyclists (p < 0.001). Direct inpatient costs were 16% greater for helmeted riders ($203,248 vs. $175,006) but led to more than 50% greater VSL generated (absolute benefit, $602,519 per helmeted survivor). CONCLUSION: A cost analysis of inpatient care and indirect costs of motorcycle riders who do not wear helmets leads to nearly $2.2 billion in losses per year, with almost 1.9 times as many deaths compared with helmeted motorcyclists. The per capita cost per fatality is more than $800,000. Institution of a mandatory helmet law could lead to an annual cost savings of almost $2.2 billion. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic analysis, level III.