Open colectomy vs. laparoscopic colectomy in Japan: a retrospective study using real-world data from the diagnosis procedure combination database.

PURPOSE: To compare the short-term outcomes of conventional open colectomy with those of laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer. METHODS: We retrieved data between January 2014 and March 2016 from the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database. A total of 69,418 patients who underwent colectomy for colon cancer were analyzed from among 15,901,766 cases of colorectal cancer. We applied a multilevel logistic regression model using a 2-level structure of individuals nested from 1065 hospitals. RESULTS: A total of 22,440 open colectomy and 46,978 laparoscopic colectomy procedures were performed. The in-hospital mortality rate was significantly lower in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (0.28% vs. 0.06%, odds ratio [OR] 0.40, p < 0.001). Similarly, the 30-day postoperative mortality rate (0.14% vs. 0.03%, OR 0.47, p = 0.019) and surgical morbidity rate (43.0% vs. 25.3%, OR 0.47, p < 0.001) were significantly lower in the laparoscopic group than in the open group. The postoperative length of stay was significantly longer in the open group (mean difference - 5.6 days, p < 0.001) than in the open group. The admission cost was significantly greater in the open group than in the laparoscopic group (mean difference - 95,080 yen, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic colectomy is safe and effective in the short term.

Outcomes of laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair based on surgical specialty: thoracic versus general surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Hiatal Hernia Repairs (HHR) are performed by both general surgeons (GS) and thoracic surgeons (TS). However, there are limited literature with respect to outcomes of HHR based on specialty training. The objective of this study was to compare the utilization, perioperative outcomes, and cost for HHR performed by GS versus TS. METHODS: The Vizient database was used to identify patients who underwent elective laparoscopic HHR between October 2014 and June 2018. Patients were grouped according to surgeon's specialty (GS vs. TS). Patient demographics and outcomes including in-hospital mortality were compared between groups. RESULTS: During the study period 13,764 patients underwent HHR by either GS or TS. GS performed 9930 (72%) cases while TS performed 3834 (28%) cases. There was no significant difference between GS versus TS with regard to serious morbidity (1.28% vs. 1.30%, p = 0.97) or mortality (0.10% vs. 0.21%, p = 0.19). The mortality index was 0.24 for GS versus 0.45 for TS. Compared to TS, laparoscopic HHR performed by GS was associated with a shorter LOS (2.57 days vs. 2.72 days, p < 0.001) and lower mean hospital costs ($7139 vs. $8032, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Within the context of academic centers, laparoscopic HHRs are mostly performed by GS with comparable outcome between general versus thoracic surgeons.

Management and Outcomes of Acute Appendicitis in the Presence of Cirrhosis: A Nationwide Analysis.

Best management for acute appendicitis (AA) in adults with liver cirrhosis is controversial and needs more investigation. We aimed to examine the impact of different treatment modalities on outcomes in this complex patient population. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample database from 2012 to 2014 was queried to identify AA patients with no cirrhosis, compensated cirrhosis (CC), and decompensated cirrhosis (DC). Each cohort was further stratified according to the treatment type: nonoperative management, open appendectomy, and laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). Chi-square, ANOVA, and binary regression analyses were used to determine differences between groups and risk factors for mortality and complications, with P < 0.05 considered statistically significant. A total of 108,289 AA patients were analyzed; of those, 304 with CC and 134 with DC were identified. Compared with CC and no cirrhosis, DC patients had significantly higher mortality, higher cost, and longer hospital length of stay. LA is accompanied by higher survival, lower cost, shorter duration of hospitalization, and lower incidence of complications across all groups. We conclude that LA is the best management strategy for AA in cirrhotic patients. Even in decompensated cirrhotics, which are associated with worse clinical outcomes, LA is still a favorable option over open appendectomy and nonoperative management.

Clinical Outcomes and Healthcare Costs Associated with Laparoscopic Appendectomy in a Middle-Income Country with Universal Health Coverage.

BACKGROUND: Although many studies have compared outcomes of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) and open appendectomy (OA), some clinical and economic outcomes continue to be controversial, particularly in low-medium-income countries. We aimed at determining clinical and economic outcomes associated with LA versus OA in adult patients in Colombia. METHODS: Retrospective, cohort study based on administrative healthcare records included all patients who underwent LA or OA in Colombia's contributory regime between July 1, 2013, and September 30, 2015. Outcomes were 30-day mortality rates, ICU admissions rates, length of stay (LOS), and hospital costs provided until discharge. Propensity score matching techniques were used to balance the baseline characteristics of patients (age, sex, comorbidities based on the Charlson index, insurer, and geographic location) and to estimate the average treatment effect (ATE) of LA as compared to OA over outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 65,625 subjects were included, 92.9% underwent OA and 7.1% LA. For the entire population, 30-day mortality was 0.74 per 100 appendectomies (95% CI 0.67-0.81), the mean and median LOS were 3.83 days and 1 day, respectively, and the ICU admissions rate during the first 30 days was 7.92% (95% CI 7.71-8.12). The ATE shows an absolute difference in the mortality rate after 30 days of -0.35 per 100 appendectomies (p = 0.023), in favor of LA. No effects on ICU admissions or LOS were identified. LA was found to increase costs by 514.13 USD on average, with total costs of 772.78 USD for OA and 1286.91 USD for LA (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In Colombia's contributory regime, LA is associated with lower 30-day mortality rate and higher hospital costs as compared to OA. No differences are found in ICU admissions or LOS.

Safety and Feasibility of a Lower-Cost Stapler in Bariatric Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic staplers are integral to bariatric surgery. Their pricing significantly impacts the overall cost of procedures. An independent device company has designed a stapler handle and single-use reloads for cross-compatibility and equivalency with existing manufacturers, at a lower cost. OBJECTIVES: We aim to demonstrate non-inferior function and cross-compatibility of a newly introduced stapler handle and reloads compared to our institution's current stapling system in a large animal survival study. SETTING: University-affiliated animal research facility, USA. METHODS: Matched small bowel anastomoses were created in four pigs, one with each stapler (a total of two per animal). After 14 days, investigators blinded to stapler type evaluated the anastomoses grossly and microscopically. Each anastomosis was scored on multiple measures of healing. Individual parameters were added for a global "healing score." RESULTS: Clinical stapler function and gross quality of anastomoses were similar between stapler groups. Individual scores for anastomotic ulceration, reepithelialization, granulation tissue, mural healing, eosinophilic infiltration, serosal inflammation, and microscopic adherences were also statistically similar. The mean "healing scores" were equal. While this study was underpowered for subtle differences, safe and reliable performance in large animals still supports the feasibility of introducing new devices into human use. CONCLUSIONS: The new stapler system delivers a similar technical performance and is cross-compatible with currently marketed stapling devices. An equivalent quality device at a lower price point should enable case cost reduction, helping to maintain hospital case margin and procedure value in the face of potentially declining reimbursement. This device may provide a safe and functional alternative to currently used laparoscopic surgical staplers.

A Comparison of the Initial Cost Associated With Resection Versus Laparoscopic Radiofrequency Ablation of Small Solitary Colorectal Liver Metastasis.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this report was to perform a cost-comparison between liver resection (LR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA). METHOD: Patients with colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM)≤3 cm, who underwent LR or laparoscopic RFA between 2006 and 2015 were included in the study. Using a prospectively maintained CRLM database, clinical, oncologic, and financial parameters were compared. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients underwent open or laparoscopic LR, and 25 patients underwent laparoscopic RFA. No significant difference was noted in postoperative complications, readmission rate, and local recurrence rate. With a median follow-up of 40 months for RFA, and 36 months for LR (P=0.61), mean cancer-specific overall survival was 51 months for RFA and 63 months for LR (P=0.64). The median disease-free survival was 14 months for RFA, and 21 months for LR (P=0.59). The mean operating room and hospital costs were 51% and 55% higher in the LR (P<0.001, each). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the study suggest that in selected patients with small solitary CRLM, laparoscopic tumor ablation might offer opportunities for cost-savings compared with resection as the primary treatment. This model may suggest possible equivalent oncologic outcomes between the 2 modalities.

Comparison of Early Morbidity and Mortality Between Sleeve Gastrectomy and Gastric Bypass in High-Risk Patients for Liver Disease: Analysis of American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic liver disease is prevalent in obese patients presenting for bariatric surgery and is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality (M&M). There are no comparative studies on the safety of different types of bariatric operations in this subset of patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare the 30-day postoperative M&M between laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-Y-gastric bypass (LRYGB) in the subset of patients with a model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score ≥ 8. METHODS: Data for LSG and LRYGB were extracted from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database from years 2012 and 2013. MELD score was calculated using serum creatinine, bilirubin, INR, and sodium. Postoperative M&M were assessed in patients with a score ≥ 8 and compared for the type of operation. This was followed by analysis for MELD subcategories. Multiple logistic regression was performed to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: Out of 34,169, 9.8% of cases had MELD ≥ 8 and were included. Primary endpoint, 30-day M&M, was significantly lower post-LSG (9.5%) compared to LRYGB (14.7%); [AOR = 0.66(0.53, 0.83)]. Superficial wound infection, prolonged hospital stay, and unplanned readmission were more common in LRYGB. M&M post-LRYGB (30.6%) was significantly higher than LSG (15.7%) among MELD15-19 subgroup analysis. CONCLUSION: LRYGB is associated with a higher postoperative risk than LSG in patients with MELD ≥ 8. The difference in postoperative complications between procedures was magnified with higher MELD. This suggests that LSG might be a safer option in morbidly obese patients with higher MELD scores, especially above 15.

Perioperative outcomes and adverse events of robotic colorectal resections for inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic literature review.

The purpose of this study was to assess outcome measures and cost-effectiveness of robotic colorectal resections in adult patients with inflammatory bowel disease. The Cochrane Library, PubMed/Medline and Embase databases were reviewed, using the text "robotic(s)" AND ("inflammatory bowel disease" OR "Crohn's" OR "Ulcerative Colitis"). Two investigators screened abstracts for eligibility. All English language full-text articles were reviewed for specified outcomes. Data were presented in a summarised and aggregate form, since the lack of higher-level evidence studies precluded meta-analysis. Primary outcomes included mortality and postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included readmission rate, length of stay, conversion rate, procedure time, estimated blood loss and functional outcome. The tertiary outcome was cost-effectiveness. Eight studies (3 case-matched observational studies, 4 case series and 1 case report) met the inclusion criteria. There was no reported mortality. Overall, complications occurred in 81 patients (54%) including 30 (20%) Clavien-Dindo III-IV complications. Mean length of stay was 8.6 days. Eleven cases (7.3%) were converted to open. The mean robotic operating time was 99 min out of a mean total operating time of 298.6 min. Thirty-two patients (24.7%) were readmitted. Functional outcomes were comparable among robotic, laparoscopic and open approaches. Case-matched observational studies comparing robotic to laparoscopic surgery revealed a significantly longer procedure time; however, conversion, complication, length of stay and readmission rates were similar. The case-matched observational study comparing robotic to open surgery also revealed a longer procedure time and a higher readmission rate; postoperative complication rates and length of stay were similar. No studies compared cost-effectiveness between robotic and traditional approaches. Although robotic resections for inflammatory bowel disease are technically feasible, outcomes must be interpreted with caution due to low-quality studies.

Effectiveness and safety of robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic hepatectomy for liver neoplasms: A meta-analysis of retrospective studies.

This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of RAH and LLR for liver neoplasms. A systematic search was performed in PubMed, EMbase, the Cochrane Library, Web of science, and China Biology Medicine disc up to July 2016 for studies that provided comparisons between the surgical outcomes of RAH and LLR for liver neoplasms. WMD, OR and 95% CI were calculated and data combined using the random-effect model. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE methods. A total of 17 studies were included in the meta-analysis, in which 487 patients were in the RAH group and 902 patients were in the LLR group. The meta-analysis results indicated: compared to LLR, RAH was associated with more estimated blood loss, longer operative time, and longer time to first nutritional intake (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in length of hospital stay, conversion rate during operation, R0 resection rate, complications and mortality (p > 0.05). Three studies reported the total cost, and the result showed a higher cost in the RAH group when compared with the LLR group (p < 0.05). This meta-analysis indicated that RAH and LLR display similar effectiveness and safety in hepatectomy. Considering the lack of high quality original studies, prospective clinical trials should be conducted to provide strong evidence for clinical guidelines formation, and the insurance coverage policies should be established to promote the application of robotic surgery in the future.

Stepwise introduction of laparoscopic liver surgery: validation of guideline recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled introduction of laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS) could compromise postoperative outcomes. A stepwise introduction of LLS combined with structured training is advised. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of such a stepwise introduction. METHODS: A retrospective, single-center case series assessing short term outcomes of all consecutive LLS in the period November 2006-January 2017. The technique was implemented in a stepwise fashion. To evaluate the impact of this stepwise approach combined with structured training, outcomes of LLS before and after a laparoscopic HPB fellowship were compared. RESULTS: A total of 135 laparoscopic resections were performed. Overall conversion rate was 4% (n = 5), clinically relevant complication rate 13% (n = 18) and mortality 0.7% (n = 1). A significant increase in patients with major LLS, multiple liver resections, previous abdominal surgery, malignancies and lesions located in posterior segments was observed after the fellowship as well as a decrease in the use of hand-assistance. Increasing complexity in the post fellowship period was reflected by an increase in operating times, but without comprising other surgical outcomes. CONCLUSION: A stepwise introduction of LLS combined with structured training reduced the clinical impact of the learning curve, thereby confirming guideline recommendations.

Cost of New Technologies in Prostate Cancer Treatment: Systematic Review of Costs and Cost Effectiveness of Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy, Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy, and Proton Beam Therapy.

CONTEXT: Some of the high costs of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), and proton beam therapy may be offset by better outcomes or less resource use during the treatment episode. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature to identify the key economic trade-offs implicit in a particular treatment choice for prostate cancer. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We systematically reviewed the literature according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement and protocol. We searched Medline, Embase, and Web of Science for articles published between January 2001 and July 2016, which compared the treatment costs of RARP, IMRT, or proton beam therapy to the standard treatment. We identified 37, nine, and three studies, respectively. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: RARP is costlier than radical retropubic prostatectomy for hospitals and payers. However, RARP has the potential for a moderate cost advantage for payers and society over a longer time horizon when optimal cancer and quality-of-life outcomes are achieved. IMRT is more expensive from a payer's perspective compared with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, but also more cost effective when defined by an incremental cost effectiveness ratio <$50 000 per quality-adjusted life year. Proton beam therapy is costlier than IMRT and its cost effectiveness remains unclear given the limited comparative data on outcomes. Using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach, the quality of evidence was low for RARP and IMRT, and very low for proton beam therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with new versus traditional technologies is costlier. However, given the low quality of evidence and the inconsistencies across studies, the precise difference in costs remains unclear. Attempts to estimate whether this increased cost is worth the expense are hampered by the uncertainty surrounding improvements in outcomes, such as cancer control and side effects of treatment. If the new technologies can consistently achieve better outcomes, then they may be cost effective. PATIENT SUMMARY: We review the cost and cost effectiveness of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and proton beam therapy in prostate cancer treatment. These technologies are costlier than their traditional counterparts. It remains unclear whether their use is associated with improved cure and reduced morbidity, and whether the increased cost is worth the expense.

Management of early colonic neoplasia: where are we now and where are we heading?

INTRODUCTION: There have been considerable advances in the endoscopic treatment of colorectal neoplasia. The development of endoscopic submucosal dissection and full thickness resection techniques is changing the way benign disease and early cancers are managed. This article reviews the evidence behind these new techniques and discusses where this field is likely to move in the future. Areas covered: A PubMed literature review of resection techniques for colonic neoplasia was performed. The clinical and cost effectiveness of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is examined. The development of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and knife assisted resection is described and issues around training reviewed. Efficacy is compared to both EMR and transanal endoscopic microsurgery. The future is considered, including full thickness resection techniques and robotic endoscopy. Expert commentary: The perceived barriers to ESD are falling, and views that such techniques are only possible in Japan are disappearing. The key barriers to uptake will be training, and the development of educational programmes should be seen as a priority. The debate between TEMS and ESD will continue, but ESD is more flexible and cheaper. This will become less significant as the number of endoscopists trained in ESD grows and some TEMS surgeons may shift across towards ESD.

Is colorectal surgery beyond the age of 80 still feasible with acceptable mortality? An analysis of the predictive value of CR-POSSUM and life expectancy after hospital discharge.

AIM: Increased morbidity and mortality could mitigate the positive effect of surgery in elderly patients undergoing colorectal resections. This retrospective study aims to describe early morbidity and mortality together with long-term survival in octogenarians and nonagenarians undergoing colorectal surgery. Predictors for in-hospital mortality are identified. The predictive value of CR-POSSUM is assessed. METHOD: Data on consecutive patients 80 years old or more undergoing a colorectal resection in our centre from 2004 until 2010 were analysed. RESULTS: Some 286 patients [median age 84 years; interquartile range (IQR) 81.6-86.1; 133 men, 47%] underwent a colorectal resection. Median follow-up was 32 months (IQR 14.5-51.2). Two hundred and fifty-eight patients (90%) were operated on for malignancy. Only 64 patients (22.4%) underwent a laparoscopic procedure. Overall median hospital stay was 12 days (IQR 9.0-20.0) and in-hospital mortality was 9.4%. Seventy-six per cent (n = 170) of patients could return home after discharge. The 1-year survival rate was 78.6% (95% CI 73.8-82.7). Median CR-POSSUM for in-hospital mortality was 12.6% (IQR 11.9-21.0). The concordance probability estimate was 0.668 (95% CI 0.609-0.728), reflecting a moderate predictive capacity of CR-POSSUM. Once patients had been discharged from hospital, life expectancy was similar to that of the Belgian general population. CONCLUSION: Colorectal surgery in octogenarians and nonagenarians resulted in a considerable in-hospital mortality of about 9%. One-year mortality added an additional 12%, which is in concordance with the overall life expectancy at that age.

Impact of frailty on approach to colonic resection: Laparoscopy vs open surgery.

AIM: To understand the influence of frailty on postoperative outcomes for laparoscopic and open colectomy. METHODS: Data were obtained from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2005-2012) for patients undergoing colon resection [open colectomy (OC) and laparoscopic colectomy (LC)]. Patients were classified as non-frail (0 points), low frailty (1 point), moderate frailty (2 points), and severe frailty (≥ 3) using the Modified Frailty Index. 30-d mortality and complications were used as the primary end point and analyzed for the overall population. Complications were grouped into major and minor. Subset analysis was performed for patients undergoing colectomy (total colectomy, partial colectomy and sigmoid colectomy) and separately for patients undergoing rectal surgery (abdominoperineal resection, low anterior resection, and proctocolectomy). We analyzed the data using SAS Platform JMP Pro version 10.0.0 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, United States). RESULTS: A total of 94811 patients were identified; the majority underwent OC (58.7%), were white (76.9%), and non-frail (44.8%). The median age was 61.3 years. Prolonged length of stay (LOS) occurred in 4.7%, and 30-d mortality was 2.28%. Patients undergoing OC were older (61.89 ± 15.31 vs 60.55 ± 14.93) and had a higher ASA score (48.3% ASA3 vs 57.7% ASA2 in the LC group) (P < 0.0001). Most patients were non-frail (42.5% OC vs 48% LC, P < 0.0001). Complications, prolonged LOS, and mortality were significantly more common in patients undergoing OC (P < 0.0001). OC had a higher risk of death and complications compared to LC for all frailty scores (non-frail: OR = 4.7, and OR = 4.67; mildly frail: OR = 2.51, and OR = 2.47; moderately frail: OR = 2.94, and OR = 2.02, severely frail: OR = 2.37, and OR = 2.34, P < 0.05) and an increase in absolute mortality with increasing frailty (non-frail 0.68% OC, mildly frail 1.39%, moderately frail 3.44%, and severely frail 5.83%, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: LC is associated with improved outcomes. Although the odds of mortality are higher in non-frail, there is a progressive increase in mortality with increasing frailty.

The Australian laparoscopic non robotic radical prostatectomy experience - analysis of 2943 cases (USANZ supplement).

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the Australian experience of high-volume Fellowship-trained Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy (LRP) surgeons. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 2943 LRP cases were performed by nine Australian surgeons. The inclusion criteria were a prospectively collected database with a minimum of 100 consecutive LRP cases. The surgeons' LRP experience commenced at various times from July 2003 to September 2009. Data were analysed for demographic, peri-operative, oncological and functional outcomes. RESULTS: The mean age of patients were 61.5 years and mean preoperative PSA 7.4 ng/ml. Mean operating time was 168 minutes with conversion to open surgery in 0.5% and a blood transfusion rate of 1.1%. Overall mean length of stay was 2.5 days. 73.6% of pathological specimens were pT2 and 86.3% had Gleason Score >7. Overall positive surgical margins (PSM) occurred in 15.9% with pT2 PSM 9.8%, pT3a PSM 30.8% and pT3b PSM 39.2%. Mean urinary continence at 12 months was 91.4% (data available from five surgeons). Mean 12 months potency after bilateral nerve spare was 47.2% (data available from four surgeons). Biochemical recurrence occurred in 10.6% (mean follow up 17 months). CONCLUSION: The Australian experience of Fellowship trained surgeons performing LRP demonstrates favourable peri-operative, oncological and functional outcomes in comparison to published data for open, laparoscopic and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy. In our Australian centres, LRP remains an acceptable minimally invasive surgical treatment for prostate cancer despite the increasing use of robotic assisted surgery.

Laparoscopic versus open ventral hernia repair: longitudinal outcomes and cost analysis using statewide claims data.

BACKGROUND: There is still considerable debate regarding the best operative approach to ventral hernia repair. Using two large statewide databases, this study sought to evaluate the longitudinal outcomes and associated costs of laparoscopic and open ventral hernia repair. METHODS: All patients undergoing elective ventral hernia repair from 2007-2011 were identified from inpatient discharge data from California and New York. In-hospital morbidity, in-hospital mortality, incidence of readmission, and incidence of revisional ventral hernia repair were evaluated as a function of surgical technique. The associated costs of medical care for laparoscopic versus open ventral hernia repair were evaluate for both the index procedure and all subsequent admissions and procedures within the study period. RESULTS: A total of 13,567 patients underwent elective ventral hernia repair with mesh; 9228 (69%) underwent OVHR and 4339 (31%) underwent LVHR. At time of the index procedure, LVHR was associated with a lower incidence of reoperation (OR 0.29, CI 0.12-0.58, p = 0.001), wound disruption (OR 0.35, CI 0.16-0.78, p = 0.01), wound infection (OR 0.50, CI 0.25-0.70, p < 0.001), blood transfusion (OR 0.47, CI 0.36-0.61, p < 0.001), ARDS (OR 0.74, CI 0.54-0.99, p < 0.05), and total index visit complications (OR 0.72, CI 0.64-0.80, p < 0.001). LVHR was associated with significantly fewer readmissions (OR 0.81, CI 0.75-0.88, p < 0.001) and a lower risk for revisional VHR (OR 0.75, CI 0.64-0.88, p < 0.001). LVHR was associated with lower total costs at 1 year ($3451, CI 1892-5011, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Open ventral hernia repair was associated with a higher incidence of perioperative complications, postoperative readmissions and need for revisional hernia repair when compared to laparoscopic ventral hernia repair, even when controlling for patient sociodemographics. In congruence, open ventral hernia repair was associated with higher costs for both the index hernia repair and tallied over the length of follow-up for readmissions and revisional hernia repair.

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery: Is it beneficial in the over 80s?

INTRODUCTION: Advanced age is often associated with higher incidence of co-morbidities, advanced cancer and post-operative complications. The aim of this study was to compare the differences in pre-operative, co-morbidities, cancer stage and surgical outcome measures between patients over the age of 80 and those below 80 undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal resection. METHOD: Data were analysed from a prospectively maintained database between February 2011 and June 2012 and patients were subdivided into two groups (over 80 and under 80). All patients underwent laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Their length of stay, high dependency unit/intensive therapy unit stay, American Society of Anaesthesiologists grade, co-morbidities, conversion rates, Dukes' stage and post-operative complication rates were compared. RESULTS: Of the 67 patients in the study, 57 were <80 at the time of surgery. Their American Society of Anaesthesiologists grade prior to surgery, as expected, was better than that of the >80 group, with 23% having an American Society of Anaesthesiologists grade of 3 compared to 60% in the >80%. The prognosis of the patients in the two groups based on Dukes' stage was similar, with 63% of the <80 s having a good prognosis, compared to 80% in the >80 s. (Good prognosis = Dukes' A or B). The conversion rates were similar (26% of the <80 s compared to 20% of the > 80 s) Post-operative length of stay was also similar in both groups (<80 s vs. >80 s: median 5 vs. 5; p = 0.33). Post-operative complication rates were similar (17% of the <80 s vs. 20% of the >80 s). CONCLUSION: The short-term outcomes following laparoscopic colorectal surgery in the elderly are similar to that of younger patients. Laparoscopic surgery should therefore be offered to all patients irrespective of age.

Creation and validation of a condition-specific venous thromboembolism risk assessment tool for ventral hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: We used the database of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program to (1) identify risk factors for 30-day venous thromboembolism (VTE) after ventral hernia repair (VHR) and (2) to create and validate a condition-specific assessment tool for the risk of VTE. METHODS: Open and laparoscopic VHR patients in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program were identified using Current Procedural Terminology code. The occurrence of VTE, including deep-venous thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolus, within 30 days postoperatively was the primary outcome. Regression-based analysis and subsequent bootstrap analysis created a weighted VTE risk assessment model (RAM) for ventral hernia repair. The weighted RAM was used to risk-stratify patients for both 30-day VTE risk and 30-day risk for medical and surgical complications. RESULTS: Data for 113,873 hernia repair patients were obtained; 30-day deep-venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolus, and VTE rates were 0.59%, 0.43%, and 0.92%, respectively. The average time to VTE was 10.8 days. A 14-factor, weighted RAM was created. The weighted risk score identified a 25-fold variability (from 0.20 to 4.97%) in VTE risk among the overall VHR population. Although created to risk-stratify for VTE, the risk score also risk-stratified for 30-day medical and surgical complications, inpatient duration of stay, and 30-day mortality. CONCLUSION: The 30-day VTE risk after VHR is 0.92%, but a 25-fold variability in VTE risk exists among the overall hernia population. We demonstrate that a weighted VTE RAM quantifies VTE risk among the population undergoing ventral hernia repair, and that VTE risk score can also be used to risk-stratify for 30-day medical and surgical complications as well as mortality.

Open versus laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (the Oslo-CoMet Study): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic liver resection is used in specialized centers all over the world. However, laparoscopic liver resection has never been compared with open liver resection in a prospective, randomized trial. METHODS/DESIGN: The Oslo-CoMet Study is a randomized trial into laparoscopic versus open liver resection for the surgical management of hepatic colorectal metastases. The primary outcome is 30-day perioperative morbidity. Secondary outcomes include 5-year survival (overall, disease-free and recurrence-free), resection margins, recurrence pattern, postoperative pain, health-related quality of life, and evaluation of the inflammatory response. A cost-utility analysis of replacing open surgery with laparoscopic surgery will also be performed. The study includes all resections for colorectal liver metastases, except formal hemihepatectomies, resections where reconstruction of vessels/bile ducts is necessary and resections that need to be combined with ablation. All patients will participate in an enhanced recovery after surgery program. A biobank of liver and tumor tissue will be established and molecular analysis will be performed. DISCUSSION: After 35 months of recruitment, 200 patients have been included in the trial. Molecular and immunology data are being analyzed. Results for primary and secondary outcome measures will be presented following the conclusion of the study (late 2015). The Oslo-CoMet Study will provide the first level 1 evidence on the benefits of laparoscopic liver resection for colorectal liver metastases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered in ClinicalTrals.gov (NCT01516710) on 19 January 2012.

Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Despite the wide diffusion of minimally invasive approaches, such as laparoscopic (LRP) and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RALP), few studies compare the results of these techniques with the retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) approach. The aim of this study is to compare the surgical, functional, and oncological outcomes and cost-effectiveness of RRP, LRP, and RALP. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed in the PubMed and Embase databases in December 2013. A 'free-text' protocol using the term 'radical prostatectomy' was applied. A total of 16,085 records were found. The authors reviewed the records to identify comparative studies to include in the review. RESULTS: 44 comparative studies were identified. With regard to the perioperative outcome, LRP and RALP were more time-consuming than RRP, but blood loss, transfusion rates, catheterisation time, hospitalisation duration, and complication rates were the most optimal in the laparoscopic approaches. With regard to the functional and oncological results, RALP was found to have the best outcomes. CONCLUSION: Our study confirmed the well-known perioperative advantage of minimally invasive techniques; however, available data were not sufficient to prove the superiority of any surgical approach in terms of functional and oncologic outcomes. On the contrary, cost comparison clearly supports RRP.