RESUMEN
PURPOSE: The objective of this study is to compare the operative time, intraoperative complications, length of stay, readmission rates, overall complications, mortality, and cost associated with Robotic Surgery (RS) and Laparascopic Surgery (LS) in anti-reflux and hiatal hernia surgery. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science and Scopus databases. Studies comparing short-term outcomes and cost between RS and LS in patients with anti-reflux and hiatal hernia were included. Data on operative time, complications, length of stay, readmission rates, overall complications, mortality, and cost were extracted. Quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the MINORS scale. RESULTS: Fourteen retrospective observational studies involving a total of 555,368 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed no statistically significant difference in operative time, intraoperative complications, length of stay, readmission rates, overall complications, and mortality between RS and LS. However, LS was associated with lower costs compared to RS. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that RS has non-inferior short-term outcomes in anti-reflux and hiatal hernia surgery, compared to LS. LS is more cost-effective, but RS offers potential benefits such as improved visualization and enhanced surgical techniques. Further research, including randomized controlled trials and long-term outcome studies, is needed to validate and refine these findings.
Asunto(s)
Reflujo Gastroesofágico , Hernia Hiatal , Laparoscopía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Hernia Hiatal/cirugía , Hernia Hiatal/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/efectos adversos , Laparoscopía/economía , Laparoscopía/efectos adversos , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/cirugía , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/economía , Tempo Operativo , Herniorrafia/economía , Herniorrafia/métodos , Herniorrafia/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Fundoplicación/economía , Fundoplicación/métodos , Readmisión del Paciente/economía , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/economíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: One of the most prevalent conditions in Western societies is gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). In Switzerland, the standard treatment for GERD is proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-based medical management, but surgical options such as Nissen fundoplication and magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) are available. RefluxStop is a novel device that offers an alternative solution. The purpose of this report is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of RefluxStop compared to PPIs and existing surgical treatments. METHODS: A model (Markov) was developed using the Swiss healthcare payer perspective with a lifetime horizon, 1-month cycle length, and a 3% annual discount rate for costs and benefits. Adverse events specific to treatment arms were incorporated, and benefits were measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Clinical efficacy data for RefluxStop was obtained from its CE mark study, and comparator treatments were based on published literature. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to explore uncertainty. Since there are no head-to-head studies between RefluxStop and PPI therapy, Nissen fundoplication, or MSA, a limitation of this study is the use of naïve, indirect comparison of clinical effectiveness between the studied treatment options. RESULTS: Higher QALYs and lower costs were provided by RefluxStop compared to Nissen fundoplication and the MSA system. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for RefluxStop was CHF 2,116 in comparison to PPI-based medical management. At a cost-effectiveness threshold of CHF 100,000 per QALY gained, the probability of RefluxStop being cost-effective was high, with probabilities of 100%, 97%, and 100% against PPI-based medical management, Nissen fundoplication, and MSA, respectively. The robustness of the analysis was provided by deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: This cost-effectiveness analysis demonstrates that there is a high likelihood of RefluxStop being a cost-effective treatment modality in adults with GERD when compared with other treatment options available in Switzerland.
Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most prevalent conditions in Western societies. Standard treatment in Switzerland entails proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-based medical management or surgical options (i.e., Nissen fundoplication and magnetic sphincter augmentation [MSA]) in selected cases. RefluxStop is a new technology indicated for the surgical treatment of GERD that restores the normal anatomy of the anti-reflux barrier. The clinical benefits and monetary costs of RefluxStop must be weighed against available treatment options to determine the role of this new technology in Switzerland. Cost-effectiveness analyses compare the relative costs and clinical outcomes of disease management when pursuing different paths in the patient journey landscape, as measured by quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). In the present study, RefluxStop in comparison to Nissen fundoplication, and MSA, provided higher QALYs and lower costs. Against PPI therapy, the costs were slightly higher but the QALYs were also higher, generating a favourable Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Furthermore, at the cost-effectiveness threshold of CHF 100,000 per QALY gained, RefluxStop was highly likely to be cost-effective in comparison to PPI therapy, Nissen fundoplication, and MSA with probabilities of 100%, 97%, and 100%, respectively. Ultimately, this cost-effectiveness analysis showed that RefluxStop has a high likelihood of cost-effectiveness as a GERD treatment in Switzerland against other treatment options, with results being robust even with uncertainties considered in additional sensitivity analyses.
Asunto(s)
Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Fundoplicación , Reflujo Gastroesofágico , Cadenas de Markov , Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Humanos , Suiza , Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones/uso terapéutico , Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones/economía , Fundoplicación/métodos , Fundoplicación/economía , Femenino , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto , AncianoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We compared the cost-effectiveness of the common surgical strategies for the management of infants with feeding difficulty. METHODS: Infants with feeding difficulty undergoing gastrostomy alone (GT), GT and fundoplication, or gastrojejunostomy (GJ) tube were enrolled between 2/2017 and 2/2018. A validated GERD symptom severity questionnaire (GSQ) and visual analog scale (VAS) to assess quality of life (QOL) were administered at baseline, 1â¯month, and every 6â¯months. Data collected included demographics, resource utilization, diagnostic studies, and costs. VAS scores were converted to quality adjusted life months (QALMs), and costs per QALM were compared using a decision tree model. RESULTS: Fifty patients initially had a GT alone (71% laparoscopically), and one had a primary GJ. Median age was 4â¯months (IQR 3-8â¯months). Median follow-up was 11â¯months (IQR 5-13â¯months). Forty-three did well with GT alone. Six (12%) required conversion from GT to GJ tube, and one required a fundoplication. Of those with GT alone, six (14%) improved significantly so that their GT was removed after a mean of 7⯱â¯3â¯months. Overall, the median GSQ score improved from 173 at baseline to 18 after 1â¯year (pâ¯<â¯0.001). VAS scores also improved from 70/100 at baseline to 85/100 at 1â¯year (pâ¯<â¯0.001). ED visits (59%), readmissions (47%), and clinic visits (88%) cost $58,091, $1,442,139, and $216,739, respectively. GJ tube had significantly higher costs for diagnostic testing compared to GT (median $8768 vs. $1007, pâ¯<â¯0.001). Conversion to GJ tube resulted in costs of $68,241 per QALM gained compared to GT only. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients improved with GT alone without needing GJ tube or fundoplication. GT and GJ tube were associated with improvement in symptoms and QOL. GJ tube patients reported greater gains in QALMS but incurred higher costs. Further analysis of willingness to pay for each additional QALM will help determine the value of care. STUDY AND LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Cost-effectiveness study, Level II.
Asunto(s)
Trastornos de Alimentación y de la Ingestión de Alimentos/economía , Trastornos de Alimentación y de la Ingestión de Alimentos/cirugía , Fundoplicación/economía , Derivación Gástrica/economía , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/cirugía , Gastrostomía/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/economía , Nutrición Enteral/economía , Trastornos de Alimentación y de la Ingestión de Alimentos/etiología , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/complicaciones , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/economía , Humanos , Lactante , Intubación Gastrointestinal/economía , Masculino , Visita a Consultorio Médico/economía , Readmisión del Paciente/economía , Calidad de Vida , Reoperación , Estudios Retrospectivos , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is a promising antireflux surgical treatment. The cost associated with the device may be perceived as a drawback by payers, which may limit the adoption of this technique. There are limited data regarding the cost of MSA in the management of reflux disease. The aims of the study were to report the clinical outcome and quality of life measures in patients after MSA and to compare the pharmaceutical and procedure payer costs and the disease-related and overall expense of MSA compared to laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) from a payer perspective. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: This prospective observational study was performed in conjunction with the region's largest health insurance company. Data were collected on patients who underwent MSA over a 2-year period beginning in September 2015 at the study network hospitals. The LNF comparison group was procured from members' claims data of the payer. Inclusion was predicated by patients having continuous coverage during study period. The total procedural reimbursement and the disease-related and overall medical claims submitted up to 12 months prior to surgery and up to 12 months following surgery were obtained. The payer reimbursement data are presented as allowed cost per member per month (PMPM). These values were then compared between groups. RESULTS: There were 195 patients who underwent MSA and 1131 that had LNF. MSA results in comparable symptom control, PPI elimination rate, and quality of life measures compared to values reported for LNF in the literature. The median (IQR) reimbursement of surgery was $13,522 (13,195-14,439) for those who underwent MSA and $13,388 (9951-16,261) for patients with LNF, p = 0.02. In patients who underwent MSA, the median reimbursement related to the upper gastrointestinal disease was $ 305 PMPM, at 12 months prior to surgery and $ 104 at 12 months after surgery, representing 66% decrease in cost. These values were $ 233 PMPM and $126 PMPM for patients who underwent LNF, representing a 46% decrease (p = 0.0001). At 12 months following surgery, the reimbursement for overall medical expenses had decreased by 10.7% in the MSA group and 1.4% in the LNF group when compared to the preoperative baseline reimbursement. The reimbursement for PPI use after surgery showed a 95% decrease in the MSA group and 90% among LNF group when compared to the preoperative baseline (p = 0.10). CONCLUSION: When compared with LNF, MSA results in a reduction of disease-related expenses for the payer in the year following surgery. While MSA is associated with a higher procedural payer cost compared to LNF, payer costs may offset due to reduction in the expenses after surgery.
Asunto(s)
Esofagoplastia/métodos , Fundoplicación/economía , Fundoplicación/métodos , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/cirugía , Laparoscopía/economía , Laparoscopía/métodos , Trastornos de Deglución/etiología , Atención a la Salud , Esofagoplastia/economía , Esofagoplastia/instrumentación , Femenino , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Ohio , Pennsylvania , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Estudios Prospectivos , Calidad de Vida , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: While clinical outcomes have been reported for anti-reflux surgery (ARS), there are limited data on post-operative encounters, including readmission, and their associated costs. This study evaluates healthcare utilization during the 90-day post-operative period following ARS including fundoplication and/or paraesophageal hernia (PEH) repair. METHODS: Data were analyzed from the Truven Health MarketScan® Databases. Patients older than 16 years with an ICD-9 procedure code or Common Procedural Terminology (CPT) code for ARS and a primary diagnosis of GERD during 2012-2014 were selected. Healthcare spending and utilization on emergency department (ED) visits, performance of outpatient endoscopy, and readmission were examined. Reasons for readmission were classified based on ICD-9 code. RESULTS: A total of 40,853 patients were included in the cohort with a mean age of 49 years and females comprising 76.0%. Mean length of stay was 1.4 days, and 93.0% of patients underwent a laparoscopic approach. The mean cost of the index surgical admission was $24,034. Readmission occurred in 4.2% of patients, and of those, 26.3% required a surgical intervention. Patients requiring one or more related readmissions accrued additional costs of $29,513. Some of the most common reasons for readmission were related to nutritional, metabolic, and fluid and electrolyte disorders. Presentation to the ED occurred in 14.0% of patients, and outpatient upper endoscopy was required in 1.5% of patients, but with much lower associated costs as compared to readmission ($1175). CONCLUSION: The majority of patients undergoing ARS do not require additional care within 90 days of surgery. Patients who are readmitted accrue costs that almost double the overall cost of care compared to the initial hospitalization. Measures to attenuate potentially preventable readmissions after ARS may reduce healthcare utilization in this patient population.
Asunto(s)
Utilización de Instalaciones y Servicios/economía , Fundoplicación/economía , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/cirugía , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Hernia Hiatal/cirugía , Herniorrafia/economía , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Atención Ambulatoria/economía , Atención Ambulatoria/estadística & datos numéricos , Bases de Datos Factuales , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/economía , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Endoscopía/economía , Utilización de Instalaciones y Servicios/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/economía , Hernia Hiatal/economía , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Readmisión del Paciente/economía , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Unclear reimbursement for new and innovative endoscopic procedures can limit adoption in clinical practice despite effectiveness in clinical trials. The aim of this study was to determine maximum cost-effective reimbursement for per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) in treating achalasia. METHODS: We constructed a decision-analytic model assessing POEM versus laparoscopic Heller myotomy with Dor fundoplication (LHM) in managing achalasia from a payer perspective over a 1-year time horizon. Reimbursement data were derived from 2017 Medicare data. Responder rates were based on clinically meaningful improvement in validated Eckardt scores. Validated health utility values were assigned to terminal health states based on data previously derived with a standard gamble technique. Contemporary willingness-to-pay (WTP) levels per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) were used to estimate maximum reimbursement for POEM using threshold analysis. RESULTS: Effectiveness of POEM and LHM was similar at 1 year of follow-up (0.91 QALY). Maximum cost-effective reimbursement for POEM was $8033.37 to $8223.14, including all professional and facility fees. This compares favorably with contemporary total reimbursement of 10 to 15 total relative value units for advanced endoscopic procedures. Rates of postprocedural GERD did not affect the preference for POEM compared with LHM, assuming at least 10% cost savings with POEM compared with LHM in cost-minimization analysis, or at least 44% cost savings in cost-effectiveness analysis (WTP = $100,000/QALY). LHM was only preferred over POEM if both procedures were reimbursed similarly, and these findings were primarily driven by lower rates of postprocedural GERD. The rate of conversion to open laparotomy due to perforation or bleeding was infrequent in published clinical practice experience, thus did not significantly affect reimbursement. DISCUSSION: POEM is an example of an innovative and potentially disruptive endoscopic technique offering greater cost-effective value and similar outcomes to the established surgical standard at contemporary reimbursement levels.
Asunto(s)
Acalasia del Esófago/terapia , Piloromiotomia/economía , Mecanismo de Reembolso , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Técnicas de Apoyo para la Decisión , Economía , Acalasia del Esófago/economía , Fundoplicación/economía , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/epidemiología , Miotomía de Heller/economía , Humanos , Invenciones/economía , Medicare , Persona de Mediana Edad , Cirugía Endoscópica por Orificios Naturales , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
In the past decade, the introduction of high-resolution manometry and the classification of achalasia into subtypes has made possible to accurately diagnose the disease and predict the response to treatment for its different subtypes. However, even to date, in an era of exponential medical progress and increased insight in disease mechanisms, treatment of patients with achalasia is still rather simplistic and mostly confined to mechanical disruption of the lower esophageal sphincter by different means. In addition, there is partial consensus on what is the best form of available treatments for patients with achalasia. Herein, we provide a comprehensive outlook to a general approach to the patient with suspected achalasia by: 1) defining the modern evaluation process; 2) describing the diagnostic value of high-resolution manometry and the Chicago Classification in predicting treatment outcomes and 3) discussing the available treatment options, considering the patient conditions, alternatives available to both the surgeon and the gastroenterologist, and the burden to the health care system. It is our hope that such discussion will contribute to value-based management of achalasia through promoting a leaner clinical flow of patients at all points of care.
Asunto(s)
Acalasia del Esófago/terapia , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/terapia , Comunicación Interdisciplinaria , Grupo de Atención al Paciente/normas , Bloqueadores de los Canales de Calcio/economía , Bloqueadores de los Canales de Calcio/uso terapéutico , Consenso , Dilatación/efectos adversos , Dilatación/economía , Dilatación/instrumentación , Dilatación/métodos , Acalasia del Esófago/diagnóstico , Acalasia del Esófago/economía , Acalasia del Esófago/fisiopatología , Esfínter Esofágico Inferior/fisiopatología , Esfínter Esofágico Inferior/cirugía , Esofagoscopía/efectos adversos , Esofagoscopía/economía , Esofagoscopía/instrumentación , Esofagoscopía/métodos , Fundoplicación/efectos adversos , Fundoplicación/economía , Fundoplicación/instrumentación , Fundoplicación/métodos , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/economía , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/fisiopatología , Reforma de la Atención de Salud , Miotomía de Heller/efectos adversos , Miotomía de Heller/economía , Miotomía de Heller/instrumentación , Miotomía de Heller/métodos , Humanos , Manometría/métodos , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Pronóstico , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Questions remain about the therapeutic durability of transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF). In this study, clinical outcomes were evaluated at 5 years post-TIF 2.0. METHODS: A total of 63 chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) sufferers with troublesome symptoms refractory to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy, absent or ≤2 cm hiatal hernia, and abnormal esophageal acid exposure were randomized to the TIF group or PPI group. Following the 6-month evaluation, all patients in the PPI group elected for crossover to TIF; therefore, all 63 patients underwent TIF 2.0 with EsophyX2 device. Primary outcome was elimination of daily troublesome regurgitation and atypical symptoms at the 5-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes were improvement in symptom scores, PPI use, reoperations, and patient health satisfaction. The cost-effectiveness of TIF 2.0 was also estimated. RESULTS: Of 63 patients, 60 were available at 1 year, 52 at 3 years, and 44 at 5 years for evaluation. Troublesome regurgitation was eliminated in 88% of patients at 1 year, 90% at 3 years, and 86% at 5 years. Resolution of troublesome atypical symptoms was achieved in 82% of patients at 1 year, 88% at 3 years, and 80% at 5 years. No serious adverse events occurred. There were 3 reoperations by the end of the 5-year follow-up. At the 5-year follow-up, 34% of patients were on daily PPI therapy as compared with 100% of patients at screening. The total GERD Health-related quality-of-life score improved by decreasing from 22.2 to 6.8 at 5 years ( P < .001). CONCLUSION: In this patient population, the TIF 2.0 procedure provided safe and sustained long-term elimination of troublesome GERD symptoms.
Asunto(s)
Fundoplicación , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/terapia , Adulto , Anciano , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Estudios Cruzados , Femenino , Fundoplicación/efectos adversos , Fundoplicación/economía , Fundoplicación/métodos , Fundoplicación/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Complicaciones Posoperatorias , Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones/uso terapéutico , Reoperación/estadística & datos numéricos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Few studies have analyzed the relationship between surgical volume and outcomes after antireflux procedures. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of surgical volume on postoperative results and costs for patients undergoing surgery for gastroesophageal reflux disease. METHODS: We analyzed the National Inpatient Sample (period 2000-2013). Adult patients (≥18 years old) with gastroesophageal reflux disease who underwent fundoplication were included. Hospital surgical volume was determined using the 30th and 60th percentile cut points using weighted discharges and categorized as low (<10 operations/year), intermediate (10-25 operations/year), or high (>25 operations/year). We performed multivariable logistic regression models to assess the effect of surgical volume on patient outcomes. RESULTS: The studied cohort comprised 75,544 patients who had antireflux surgery. When operations performed at low-volume hospitals, postoperative bleeding, cardiac failure, renal failure, respiratory failure, and inpatient mortality were more common. In intermediate-volume hospitals, patients were more likely to have postoperative infection, esophageal perforation, bleeding, cardiac failure, renal failure, and respiratory failure. The length of hospital stay was longer at low- and intermediate-volume hospitals (1.08 and 0.55 days longer, respectively). There was an increase in charges of 5120 dollars per patient at low-volume centers, and 4010 dollars per patient at intermediate-volume centers. CONCLUSIONS: When antireflux surgery is performed at high-volume hospitals, morbidity is lower, length of hospital stay is shorter, and costs for the healthcare system are decreased.
Asunto(s)
Fundoplicación/efectos adversos , Fundoplicación/estadística & datos numéricos , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/cirugía , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitales de Alto Volumen/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitales de Bajo Volumen/estadística & datos numéricos , Hemorragia Posoperatoria/etiología , Lesión Renal Aguda/etiología , Adulto , Anciano , Bases de Datos Factuales , Perforación del Esófago/etiología , Femenino , Fundoplicación/economía , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/etiología , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Hospitales de Bajo Volumen/economía , Humanos , Infecciones/etiología , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/etiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND/AIM: Several uncontrolled studies comparing peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) and Heller myotomy have demonstrated equivalent short-term efficacy and safety. However, no data exists rergarding the cost of POEM and how it compares to that of robotic Heller myotomy (RHM). The primary aim of this study was to compare the inpatient charges incurred in patients who underwent POEM or RHM for the treatment of achalasia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective single center review was conducted among 52 consecutive POEM patients (2012-2014) and 52 consecutive RHM patients (2009-2014). All RHM procedures included a Toupet fundoplication and were performed via a transabdominal approach. All POEM procedures were performed by a gastroenterologist in the endoscopy unit. Clinical response was defined by improvement of symptoms and decrease in Eckardt stage to ≤I. All procedural and facility charges were obtained from review of the hospital finance records. RESULTS: There was no difference between POEM and RHM with regards to age, gender, symptom duration, achalasia subtype, manometry findings, or Eckardt symptom stage. There was no significant difference in the rate of adverse events (19.2% vs 9.6%, P = 0.26) or the length of stay (1.9 vs. 2.3, P = 0.18) between both groups. Clinical response rate of patients in the POEM groups was similar to that in the RHM group (94.3% vs. 88.5%, P = 0.48). POEM incurred significantly less total charges compared to LHM ($14481 vs. $17782, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: POEM when performed in an endoscopy unit was similar in efficacy and safety to RHM. However, POEM was associated with significant cost savings ($3301/procedure).
Asunto(s)
Acalasia del Esófago/cirugía , Esofagoscopía/economía , Fundoplicación/instrumentación , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/métodos , Adulto , Acalasia del Esófago/economía , Esofagoscopía/métodos , Femenino , Fundoplicación/economía , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos/métodos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/economía , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic antireflux surgery (LARS) has proven to be as effective as open antireflux surgery (OARS), but it is associated with a shorter hospital stay and a faster recover. The aims of this study were to assess the national use of LARS in the US and to compare the perioperative outcomes between laparoscopic and open antireflux procedures in a national cohort. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective population-based analysis was performed using the National Inpatient Sample for the period 2000 to 2013. The study included adult patients (18 years and older) diagnosed with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), who underwent either laparoscopic or open fundoplication. Multivariable linear and logistic regression, adjusted for patient demographics, comorbidities, and hospital characteristics were used to assess the effect of the laparoscopic approach on patient outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 75,544 patients were included, with 44,089 having LARS (58.4%) and 31,455 having OARS (41.6%). The rate of laparoscopic procedures increased from 24.8 LARS per 100 procedures in 2000, to 84.3 LARS per 100 procedures in 2013 (p < 0.0001). Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery were less likely to experience postoperative venous thromboembolism, wound complications, infection, esophageal perforation, bleeding, cardiac failure, renal failure, respiratory failure, shock, and inpatient mortality. On average, the laparoscopic approach reduced length of stay by 2.1 days, and decreased hospital charges by $9,530. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the laparoscopic approach for the surgical treatment of GERD has increased significantly in the last decade in the US. This approach is associated with lower morbidity and mortality, shorter hospital stay, and lower costs for the health care system.
Asunto(s)
Fundoplicación/economía , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/cirugía , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Laparoscopía/economía , Adulto , Femenino , Fundoplicación/métodos , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Achalasia is a rare motility disorder of the esophagus. Treatment is palliative with the goal of symptom remission and slowing the progression of the disease. Treatment options include per oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LM) and endoscopic treatments such as pneumatic dilation (PD) and botulinum toxin type A injections (BI). We evaluate the economics and cost-effectiveness of treating achalasia. METHODS: We performed cost analysis for POEM, LM, PD and BI at our institution from 2011 to 2015. Cost of LM was set to 1, and other procedures are presented as percentage change. Cost-effectiveness was calculated based on cost, number of interventions required for optimal results for dilations and injections and efficacy reported in the current literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated by a cost-utility analysis using quality-adjusted life year gained, defined as a symptom-free year in a patient with achalasia. RESULTS: Average number of interventions required was 2.3 dilations or two injections for efficacies of 80 and 61 %, respectively. POEM cost 1.058 times the cost of LM, and PD and BI cost 0.559 and 0.448 times the cost of LM. Annual cost per cure over a period of 4 years for POEM, and LM were consistently equivalent, trending the same as PD although this has a lower initial cost. The cost per cure of BI remains stable over 3 years and then doubles. CONCLUSION: The cost-effectiveness of POEM and LM is equivalent. Myotomy, either surgical or endoscopic, is more cost-effective than BI due to high failure rates of the economical intervention. When treatment is being considered BI should be utilized in patients with less than 2-year life expectancy. Pneumatic dilations are cost-effective and are an acceptable approach to treatment of achalasia, although myotomy has a lower relapse rate and is cost-effective compared to PD after 2 years.
Asunto(s)
Acalasia del Esófago/cirugía , Cirugía Endoscópica por Orificios Naturales/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Acalasia del Esófago/economía , Acalasia del Esófago/patología , Fundoplicación/economía , Fundoplicación/métodos , Humanos , Complicaciones Intraoperatorias/prevención & control , Tempo Operativo , Cuidados Paliativos/economía , Cuidados Paliativos/métodos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/prevención & control , Calidad de Vida , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Recurrencia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Robotic surgical systems have been used at a rapidly increasing rate in general surgery. Many of these procedures have been performed laparoscopically for years. In a surgical encounter, a significant portion of the total costs is associated with consumable supplies. Our hospital system has invested in a software program that can track the costs of consumable surgical supplies. We sought to determine the differences in cost of consumables with elective laparoscopic and robotic procedures for our health care organization. METHODS: De-identified procedural cost and equipment utilization data were collected from the Surgical Profitability Compass Procedure Cost Manager System (The Advisory Board Company, Washington, DC) for our health care system for laparoscopic and robotic cholecystectomy, fundoplication, and inguinal hernia between the years 2013 and 2015. Outcomes were length of stay, case duration, and supply cost. Statistical analysis was performed using a t-test for continuous variables, and statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05. RESULTS: The total cost of consumable surgical supplies was significantly greater for all robotic procedures. Length of stay did not differ for fundoplication or cholecystectomy. Length of stay was greater for robotic inguinal hernia repair. Case duration was similar for cholecystectomy (84.3 robotic and 75.5 min laparoscopic, p = 0.08), but significantly longer for robotic fundoplication (197.2 robotic and 162.1 min laparoscopic, p = 0.01) and inguinal hernia repair (124.0 robotic and 84.4 min laparoscopic, p = âª0.01). CONCLUSIONS: We found a significantly increased cost of general surgery procedures for our health care system when cases commonly performed laparoscopically are instead performed robotically. Our analysis is limited by the fact that we only included costs associated with consumable surgical supplies. The initial acquisition cost (over $1 million for robotic surgical system), depreciation, and service contract for the robotic and laparoscopic systems were not included in this analysis.
Asunto(s)
Colecistectomía/economía , Fundoplicación/economía , Hernia Inguinal/economía , Laparoscopía/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/economía , Colecistectomía/métodos , Costos y Análisis de Costo , Hernia Inguinal/cirugía , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación , Tempo Operativo , WisconsinRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Healthcare systems and surgeons are under increasing pressure to provide high-quality care for the lowest possible cost . This study utilizes national data to examine the outcomes and costs of common laparoscopic procedures based on hospital type and location. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample was queried from 2008 to 2011 for five laparoscopic procedures: colectomy (LC), inguinal hernia repair, ventral hernia repair (LVHR), Nissen fundoplication (NF), and cholecystectomy (LCh). Outcomes, including complication rate and inpatient mortality, were stratified by region and hospital type. Both univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed using regression-based survey methods; risk-adjusted mean costs for hospital were calculated after adjusting for patient characteristics. RESULTS: In univariate analysis, the rates of minor complications varied significantly between geographic regions for LCh, LC, NF, and LVHR (p < 0.05). Though LCh and LVHR had statistical variation between regions for rates of major complications (p < 0.05), all regions were equivalent in rates of inpatient mortality for the procedures (p > 0.05). Rural and urban centers had similar rates of complications (p > 0.05), except for higher rates of major complications following IHR and LC in rural centers (p < 0.02) and following Nissen fundoplication in urban facilities(p < 0.0003). Though urban centers were more expensive for all procedures (p < 0.0001), mortality was similar between groups (p > 0.05). For hospital ownership, private investor-owned facilities were substantially more expensive (p < 0.0001), but had no significant differences in complications compared to other hospital types (p > 0.05). In multivariate analysis, while patient factors helped explain differences between outcome differences in different hospital types and locations, in general, the difference in cost remained statistically significant between hospitals. CONCLUSION: Though patient demographics and characteristics accounted for some differences in postoperative outcomes after common laparoscopic procedures, higher cost of care was not associated with better outcomes or more complex patients.
Asunto(s)
Laparoscopía/economía , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Anciano , Colecistectomía/economía , Estudios de Cohortes , Colectomía/economía , Bases de Datos Factuales , Fundoplicación/economía , Hernia Inguinal/economía , Hernia Inguinal/cirugía , Hernia Ventral/economía , Hernia Ventral/cirugía , Herniorrafia/economía , Herniorrafia/métodos , Hospitales/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Laparoscopía/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Propiedad , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Servicios de Salud Rural , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Servicios Urbanos de SaludRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is approved for uncomplicated GERD. Multiple studies have shown MSA to compare favorably to laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) in terms of symptom control with results out to 5 years. The MSA device itself, however, is an added cost to an anti-reflux surgery, and direct cost comparison studies have not been done between MSA and LNF. The aim of the study was to compare charges, complications, and outcome of MSA versus LNF at 1 year. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent MSA or LNF for the treatment of GERD between January 2010 and June 2013. Patient charges were collected for the surgical admission. We also collected data on 30-day complications and symptom control at 1 year assessed by GERD-HRQL score and PPI use. RESULTS: There were 119 patients included in the study, 52 MSA and 67 LNF. There was no significant difference between the mean charges for MSA and LNF ($48,491 vs. $50,111, p = 0.506). There were significant differences in OR time (66 min MSA vs. 82 min LNF, p < 0.01) and LOS (17 h MSA vs. 38 h LNF, p < 0.01). At 1-year follow-up, mean GERD-HRQL was 4.3 for MSA versus 5.1 for LNF (p = 0.47) and 85 % of MSA patients versus 92 % of LNF patients were free from PPIs (p = 0.37). MSA patients reported less gas bloat symptoms (23 vs. 53 %, p ≤ 0.01) and inability to belch (10 vs. 36 %, p ≤ 0.01) and vomit (4 vs. 19 %, p ≤ 0.01). CONCLUSION: The side effect profile of MSA is better than LNF as evidenced by less gas bloat and increase ability to belch and vomit. LNF and MSA are comparable in symptom control, safety, and overall hospital charges. The charge for the MSA device is offset by less charges in other categories as a result of the shorter operative time and LOS.
Asunto(s)
Esfínter Esofágico Inferior/cirugía , Fundoplicación/economía , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/cirugía , Precios de Hospital , Laparoscopía/economía , Imanes , Costos y Análisis de Costo , Trastornos de Deglución/epidemiología , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos del Sistema Digestivo/economía , Femenino , Flatulencia/epidemiología , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/tratamiento farmacológico , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Tempo Operativo , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones/uso terapéutico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: To evaluate utilization and costs associated with robotic surgery in children. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified patients in the Pediatric Health Information System database who underwent robotic surgery between October 2008 and December 2013. After determining the six most frequently performed surgeries in this group, we identified patients who underwent equivalent nonrobotic surgeries at the same hospitals. Equivalent surgeries were defined as open procedures for urology and laparoscopic procedures for general surgery. We examined trends in the numbers of surgeries performed and compared hospitalization costs between patients undergoing elective robotic and nonrobotic surgery for each procedure. RESULTS: The number of robotic surgeries performed increased by 19.8% per year (P < 0.001). The most common robotic surgeries performed were pyeloplasty (n = 760), ureteral reimplantation (n = 351), nephrectomy (n = 145), partial nephrectomy (n = 56), gastrointestinal antireflux procedure (n = 61), and cholecystectomy (n = 46). Total increase over time was primarily driven by increases in urologic surgeries (17.4% per year, P < 0.001). Postoperative length of stay was shorter after robotic surgeries than equivalent open urologic surgeries but not equivalent laparoscopic general surgery procedures. Total hospitalization costs were higher for robotic surgeries than equivalent urologic or general surgery procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Use of robotic surgery in pediatrics is increasing especially in the management of urologic conditions. Costs of robotic surgery-associated hospitalizations were higher than nonrobotic surgery-associated hospitalizations.
Asunto(s)
Colecistectomía/métodos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/métodos , Fundoplicación/métodos , Costos de Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Urológicos/métodos , Niño , Preescolar , Colecistectomía/economía , Colecistectomía/tendencias , Bases de Datos Factuales , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/tendencias , Femenino , Fundoplicación/economía , Fundoplicación/tendencias , Hospitales Pediátricos/economía , Humanos , Lactante , Laparoscopía/economía , Laparoscopía/estadística & datos numéricos , Laparoscopía/tendencias , Masculino , Pediatría , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/tendencias , Estados Unidos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Urológicos/economía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Urológicos/tendenciasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The long-term cost effectiveness of medical, endoscopic, and operative treatments for adults with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remains unclear. We sought to estimate the cost effectiveness of medical, endoscopic, and operative treatments for adults with GERD who require daily proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. METHODS: A Markov model was generated from the payer's perspective using a 6-month cycle and 30-year time horizon. The base-case patient was a 45-year-old man with symptomatic GERD taking 20 mg of omeprazole twice daily. Four treatment strategies were analyzed: PPI therapy, transoral incisionless fundoplication (EsophyX), radiofrequency energy application to the lower esophageal sphincter (Stretta) and laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication. The model parameters were selected using the published literature and institutional billing data. The main outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained) for each therapy. RESULTS: In the base case analysis, which assumed a PPI cost of $234 over 6 months ($39 per month), Stretta and laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication were the most cost-effective options over a 30-year time period ($2,470.66 and $5,579.28 per QALY gained, respectively). If the cost of PPI therapy exceeded $90.63 per month over 30 years, laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication became the dominant treatment option. EsophyX was dominated by laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication at all points in time. CONCLUSION: Low-cost PPIs, Stretta, and laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication all represent cost-effective treatment strategies. In this model, when PPIs exceed $90 per month, medical therapy is no longer cost effective. Procedural GERD therapy should be considered for patients who require high-dose or expensive PPIs.
Asunto(s)
Fundoplicación/economía , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/economía , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/terapia , Modelos Económicos , Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones/economía , Fundoplicación/métodos , Gastroscopía , Humanos , Laparoscopía , Masculino , Cadenas de Markov , Persona de Mediana Edad , Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones/uso terapéutico , Terapia por Radiofrecuencia , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
Although fundoplication has been found effective in the treatment of reflux disease, its long-term results have raised doubts due to the large number of patients taking acid blocker medication after the operation. Based on the five-year follow-up of the REFLUX study, reflux symptoms and quality of life associated with reflux were improved after the operation. Laparoscopic fundoplication was found to be a cost-effective form of treatment among those having a chronic reflux disease. The operation can be recommended for treating reflux disease in patients exhibiting a non-optimal PPI drug response.
Asunto(s)
Fundoplicación/economía , Fundoplicación/métodos , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/cirugía , Laparoscopía , Enfermedad Crónica , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Humanos , Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones/uso terapéutico , Calidad de VidaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Day-case laparoscopic Nissen-Rossetti fundoplication (LF) has been demonstrated to be safe in small, prospective cohorts. The purpose of the study was to compare postoperative course, functional results, quality of life, and healthcare costs in patients undergoing LF in a day-case surgical unit with same-day discharge and patients undergoing LF as an inpatient. METHODS: All consecutive patients in our department who underwent a primary LF for symptomatic uncomplicated gastroesophageal reflux disease from 2004 to 2011 were entered into a prospective database (n = 292). From 101 same-day discharge patients (day-case group), control inpatient procedures were randomly matched by age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, and presence of a hiatal hernia (inpatient group, n = 101). RESULTS: No postoperative deaths occurred and postoperative morbidity occurred in 9.4% of patients. When comparing day-case and inpatient groups, postoperative morbidity rates were 9.9 vs. 8.9% (p = 0.81) with median hospital stays and readmission rates of 1 vs. 4 days (p < 0.001) and 7.9 vs. 0% (p < 0.001), respectively. Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index was significantly enhanced due to surgery (p < 0.001) and comparable in the two groups. Estimated direct healthcare costs per patient were 2,248 euros in the day-case group vs. 6,569 euros in the inpatient group (p < 0.001), equivalent to a cost saving of 3,921 euros. CONCLUSIONS: Day-case and inpatient approaches after LF give similar results in terms of postoperative mortality and morbidity, functional outcomes and quality of life, with a substantial cost saving in favor of a day-case procedure.
Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Ambulatorios/economía , Fundoplicación/economía , Hospitalización/economía , Laparoscopía , Calidad de Vida , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Ahorro de Costo , Trastornos de Deglución/etiología , Trastornos de Deglución/cirugía , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Francia , Fundoplicación/métodos , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/cirugía , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Visita a Consultorio Médico/estadística & datos numéricos , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Satisfacción del Paciente , Complicaciones Posoperatorias , Estudios Prospectivos , Reoperación/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Gastro-esophageal reflux disease is a troublesome disease for many patients, severely affecting their quality of life. Choice of treatment depends on a combination of patient characteristics and preferences, esophageal motility and damage of reflux, symptom severity and symptom correlation to acid reflux and physician preferences. Success of treatment depends on tailoring treatment modalities to the individual patient and adequate selection of treatment choice. PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) were searched for systematic reviews with an abstract, publication date within the last five years, in humans only, on key terms (laparosc* OR laparoscopy*) AND (fundoplication OR reflux* OR GORD OR GERD OR nissen OR toupet) NOT (achal* OR pediat*). Last search was performed on July 23nd and in total 54 articles were evaluated as relevant from this search. The laparoscopic Toupet fundoplication is the therapy of choice for normal-weight GERD patients qualifying for laparoscopic surgery. No better pharmaceutical, endoluminal or surgical alternatives are present to date. No firm conclusion can be stated on its cost-effectiveness. Results have to be awaited comparing the laparoscopic 180-degree anterior fundoplication with the Toupet fundoplication to be a possible better surgical alternative. Division of the short gastric vessels is not to be recommended, nor is the use of a bougie or a mesh in the vast majority of GERD patients undergoing surgery. The use of a robot is not recommended. Anti-reflux surgery is to be considered expert surgery, but there is no clear consensus what is to be called an 'expert surgeon'. As for setting, ambulatory settings seem promising although high-level evidence is lacking.