RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Although several studies report that the robotic approach is more costly than laparoscopy, the cost-effectiveness of robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) over laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is still an issue. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of the RDP and LDP approaches across several Spanish centres. METHODS: This study is an observational, multicenter, national prospective study (ROBOCOSTES). For one year from 2022, all consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy were included, and clinical, QALY, and cost data were prospectively collected. The primary aim was to analyze the cost-effectiveness between RDP and LDP. RESULTS: During the study period, 80 procedures from 14 Spanish centres were analyzed. LDP had a shorter operative time than the RDP approach (192.2 min vs 241.3 min, p = 0.004). RDP showed a lower conversion rate (19.5% vs 2.5%, p = 0.006) and a lower splenectomy rate (60% vs 26.5%, p = 0.004). A statistically significant difference was reported for the Comprehensive Complication Index between the two study groups, favouring the robotic approach (12.7 vs 6.1, p = 0.022). RDP was associated with increased operative costs of 1600 euros (p < 0.031), while overall cost expenses resulted in being 1070.92 Euros higher than the LDP but without a statistically significant difference (p = 0.064). The mean QALYs at 90 days after surgery for RDP (0.9534) were higher than those of LDP (0.8882) (p = 0.030). At a willingness-to-pay threshold of 20,000 and 30,000 euros, there was a 62.64% and 71.30% probability that RDP was more cost-effective than LDP, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The RDP procedure in the Spanish healthcare system appears more cost-effective than the LDP.
Asunto(s)
Neurilemoma/diagnóstico , Neoplasias del Recto/patología , Recto/inervación , Cirugía Endoscópica Transanal/métodos , Colonoscopía/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Espectroscopía de Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Márgenes de Escisión , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neurilemoma/cirugía , Recto/patología , Recto/cirugía , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Global studies indicate that surgical site infections (SSIs) are a major healthcare challenge within hospitals and can have a profound impact on patient quality of life and healthcare costs. Closed-incision negative-pressure therapy (ciNPT) has been reported to provide positive clinical benefits for patients with various incisions, including those following colorectal surgeries. METHODS: Investigators performed a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial to evaluate complications of surgical incisions in patients who received a ciNPT dressing versus a conventional surgical dressing (control) over their closed incision following colorectal surgery. The incidence of SSI was determined at 7, 15, and 30 days postsurgery. RESULTS: A total of 148 patients participated in the study. Results showed that the SSI rate on day 7 was lower in the ciNPT group versus the control group (10/75 [13.3%] vs 17/73 [23.3%]), but this difference was not statistically significant. On day 15, the SSI rate was 12/75 (16.0%) in the ciNPT group versus 21/73 (28.8%) in the control group; however, this difference was only marginally statistically significant (P = .0621). At 1 month, the SSI rate remained lower in the ciNPT group (13/75 [17.3%] vs 21/73 [28.8%], P = .0983) compared with the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies with larger population sizes are necessary to determine the impact of ciNPT on patients' incisions after colorectal surgery.
Asunto(s)
Vendajes/normas , Neoplasias Colorrectales/cirugía , Terapia de Presión Negativa para Heridas/normas , Herida Quirúrgica/terapia , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Vendajes/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/complicaciones , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos del Sistema Digestivo/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos del Sistema Digestivo/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Terapia de Presión Negativa para Heridas/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Prospectivos , Herida Quirúrgica/fisiopatologíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To analyse acute cholecystitis (AC) management during the first pandemic outbreak after the recommendations given by the surgical societies estimating: morbidity, length of hospital stay, mortality and hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection rate. METHODS: Multicentre-combined (retrospective-prospective) cohort study with AC patients in the Community of Madrid between 1st March and 30th May 2020. 257 AC patients were involved in 16 public hospital. Multivariant binomial logistic regression (MBLR) was applied to mortality. RESULTS: Of COVID-19 patients, 30 were diagnosed at admission and 12 patients were diagnosed during de admission or 30 days after discharge. In non-COVID-19 patients, antibiotic therapy was received in 61.3% of grade I AC and 40.6% of grade II AC. 52.4% of grade III AC were treated with percutaneous drainage (PD). Median hospital stay was 5 [3-8] days, which was higher in the non-surgical treatment group with 7.51 days (p < 0.001) and a 3.25% of mortality rate (p < 0.21). 93.3% of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection at admission were treated with non-surgical treatment (p = 0.03), median hospital stay was 11.0 [7.5-27.5] days (p < 0.001) with a 7.5% of mortality rate (p > 0.05). In patients with hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection, 91.7% of grade I-II AC were treated with non-surgical treatment (p = 0.037), with a median hospital stay of 16 [4-21] days and a 18.2% mortality rate (p > 0.05). Hospital-acquired infection risk when hospital stay is > 7 days is OR 4.7, CI 95% (1.3-16.6), p = 0.009. COVID-19 mortality rate was 11.9%, AC severity adjusted OR 5.64 (CI 95% 1.417-22.64). In MBLR analysis, age (OR 1.15, CI 95% 1.02-1.31), SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR 14.49, CI 95% 1.33-157.81), conservative treatment failure (OR 8.2, CI 95% 1.34-50.49) and AC severity were associated with an increased odd of mortality. CONCLUSION: In our population, during COVID-19 pandemic, there was an increase of non-surgical treatment which was accompanied by an increase of conservative treatment failure, morbidity and hospital stay length which may have led to an increased risk hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection. Age, SARS-CoV-2 infection, AC severity and conservative treatment failure were mortality risk factors.