Hospital costs of robotic-assisted and open treatment of large ventral hernias.

Robotic-assisted treatment of ventral hernia offers many advantages, however, studies reported higher costs for robotic surgery compared to other surgical techniques. We aimed at comparing hospital costs in patients undergoing large ventral hernia repair with either robotic or open surgery. We searched from a prospectively maintained database patients who underwent robotic or open surgery for the treatment of the large ventral hernias from January 2016 to December 2022. The primary endpoint was to assess costs in both groups. For eligible patients, data was extracted and analyzed using a propensity score-matching. Sixty-seven patients were retrieved from our database. Thirty-four underwent robotic-assisted surgery and 33 open surgery. Mean age was 66.4 ± 4.1 years, 50% of patients were male. After a propensity score-matching, a similar total cost of EUR 18,297 ± 8,435 vs. 18,024 ± 7514 (p = 0.913) in robotic-assisted and open surgery groups was noted. Direct and indirect costs were similar in both groups. Robotic surgery showed higher operatory theatre-related costs (EUR 7532 ± 2,091 vs. 3351 ± 1872, p < 0.001), which were compensated by shorter hospital stay-related costs (EUR 4265 ± 4366 vs. 7373 ± 4698, p = 0.032). In the treatment of large ventral hernia, robotic surgery had higher operatory theatre-related costs, however, they were fully compensated by shorter hospital stays and resulting in similar total costs.

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Wittmann Patch-Assisted Abdominal Closure Compared to Planned Ventral Hernia in Management of the Open Abdomen.

BACKGROUND: Inability to achieve primary fascial closure after damage control laparotomy is a frequently encountered problem by acute care and trauma surgeons. This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of Wittmann patch-assisted closure to the planned ventral hernia closure. METHODS: A literature review was performed to determine the probabilities and outcomes for Wittmann patch-assisted primary closure and planned ventral hernia closure techniques. Average utility scores were obtained by a patient-administered survey for the following: rate of successful surgeries (uncomplicated abdominal wall closure), surgical site infection, wound dehiscence, abdominal hernia and enterocutaneous fistula. A visual analogue scale (VAS) was utilized to assess the survey responses and then converted to quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Total cost for each strategy was calculated using Medicare billing codes. A decision tree was generated with rollback and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) analyses. Sensitivity analyses were performed to account for uncertainty. RESULTS: Wittmann patch-assisted closure was associated with higher clinical effectiveness of 19.43 QALYs compared to planned ventral hernia repair (19.38), with a relative cost reduction of US$7777. Rollback analysis supported Wittmann patch-assisted closure as the more cost-effective strategy. The resulting negative ICUR of -156,679.77 favored Wittmann patch-assisted closure. Monte Carlo analysis demonstrated a confidence of 96.8% that Wittmann patch-assisted closure was cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates using the Wittmann patch-assisted closure strategy as a more cost-efficient management of the open abdomen compared to the planned ventral hernia approach.

Robotic-assisted repair of complex ventral hernia: can it pay off?

Pressure on health care providers is growing due to capping of remuneration for medical services in most Western European countries. We wanted to investigate, if robotic-assisted ventral hernia repair is reasonable from an economic point of view in our setting. Patients undergoing open or robotic-assisted repair for complex abdominal wall hernia using a Transversus Abdominis Release (TAR) between September 2017 and January 2019 were included. Procedure-related costs were calculated exact to the minute and cost unit accounting for the postoperative in-patient stay was done. Abdominal wall reconstruction using the TAR-technique was done in a total of 26 (10 female) patients via an open (n = 10) or robotic-assisted (n = 16) approach. No significant difference was seen in regard to age, BMI and ASA scores between subgroups. Time for operation was longer (253.5 vs 211.5 min; p = 0.0322), while postoperative hospital stay was shorter for patients operated with a robotic-assisted approach (4.5 vs 12.5 days; p < 0.005). Procedure-related costs were 2.7-fold higher when a robotic-assisted reconstruction was done (EUR 5397 vs. 1989), while total costs for in-patient stay were about 60% lower (EUR 2715 vs 6663). Currently, revenues by national insurance account for a total of EUR 9577 leading to a profit of EUR 1465 and 925 for the robotic-assisted and open myofascial release, respectively. In addition, 30-day re-admission rate was in favor of the robotic-assisted approach as well (6.3% vs 20%). From an economic point of view, robotic-assisted TAR for complex ventral hernia repair is a viable option in our setting. Higher procedure-related costs are offset by a significant shorter hospital stay. The economic advantage goes along with improvement in outcome of patients.

[Minimally invasive ventral hernia repair: apply or save?] / Maloinvazivnye tekhnologii v gerniologii: primenyat' nel'zya ekonomit'.

Treatment of patients with ventral hernias remains one of the most pressing problems of abdominal surgery. Surgeons are trying to find a «gold standard¼ for the treatment of this pathology. Great hopes are placed on minimally invasive techniques, however, due to their high cost, they do not yet find mass distribution in everyday practice. In our opinion, this is short-sighted. We tried to analyze the feasibility of using minimally invasive techniques in the treatment of patients with ventral hernias of various locations, from the position of clinical and economic efficiency.

Enhanced value with implementation of an ERAS protocol for ventral hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Open ventral hernia repair (VHR) is associated with postoperative complications and hospital readmissions. A comprehensive Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocol for VHR contributes to improved clinical outcomes including the rapid return of bowel function and reduced infections. The purpose of this study was to compare hospital costs for patients cared for prior to ERAS implementation with patients cared for with an ERAS protocol. METHODS: With IRB approval, clinical characteristics and postoperative outcomes data were obtained via retrospective review of consecutive VHR patients 2 years prior to and 14 months post ERAS implementation. Hospital cost data were obtained from the cost accounting system inclusive of index hospitalization. Clinical data and hospital costs were compared between groups. RESULTS: Data for 178 patients (127 pre-ERAS, 51 post-ERAS) were analyzed. Preoperative and operative characteristics including gender, ASA class, comorbidities, and BMI were similar between groups. ERAS patients had faster return of bowel function (p = 0.001) and decreased incidence of superficial surgical site infection (p = 0.003). Hospital length of stay did not vary significantly pre and post ERAS implementation. Inpatient pharmacy costs were increased in ERAS group ($2673 vs. $1176 p < 0.001), but total hospital costs (14,692 vs. 15,151, p = 0.538) were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Standardization of hernia care via ERAS protocol improves clinical outcomes without impacting total costs.

The hidden costs of open hepatectomy: A 10-year, single institution series of right-sided hepatectomies.

BACKGROUND: Incisional ventral hernias(IVH) are a common complication following open abdominal surgery. The aim of this study was to uncover the hidden costs of IVH following right-sided hepatectomy. METHODS: Outcomes and hospital billing data for patients undergoing open(ORH) and laparoscopic right-sided hepatectomies(LRH) were reviewed from 2008 to 2018. RESULTS: Of 327 patients undergoing right-sided hepatectomies, 231 patients were included into two groups: ORH(n = 118) and LRH(n = 113). Median follow-up-times and time-to-hernia were 24.9-months(0.3-128.4 months) and 40.5-months(0.4-81.4 months), respectively. The incidence of hernias at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years was 6/231(2.6%), 13/231(5.6%), 15(6.5%), and 17/231(7.4%); ORH = 14, LRH = 3, p = 0.003), respectively. In terms of IVH repair(IVHR), total operative costs ($10,719.27vs.$4,441.30,p < 0.001) and overall care costs ($20,541.09vs.$7,149.21,p = 0.044) were significantly greater for patients undergoing ORH. Patients whom underwent ORHs had longer hospital stays and more complications following IVHR. Risk analysis identified ORH(RR-10.860), male gender(RR-3.558), BMI ≥30 kg/m2(RR-5.157), and previous abdominal surgery(RR-6.870) as predictors for hernia development (p < 0.030). CONCLUSION: Evaluation of pre-operative hernia risk factors and utilization of a laparoscopic approach to right-sided hepatectomy reduces incisional ventral hernia incidence and cost when repair is needed.

Costs Associated With Modifiable Risk Factors in Ventral and Incisional Hernia Repair.

Importance: Ventral and incisional hernia repair (VIHR) is an extremely common operation, after which complications are also fairly common. A number of preoperative risk factors are known to contribute to increased complications after surgical repair; however, the individual relative association of these risk factors with adverse outcomes and increased spending is unclear. Quantifying the association of individual risk factors may help surgeons implement targeted surgical optimization, improve outcomes, and reduce spending. Objective: To identify the attributable association of modifiable risk factors for adverse outcomes after VIHR on outcomes and episode-of-care payments. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study was performed using a population-based sample of adult patients and episode spending data from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2018, from a statewide multipayer registry. A multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression model was used to examine the contribution of patient-specific risk factors to adverse outcomes. Attributable risk and population attributable risk fraction were calculated to estimate the additional spending attributable to individual risk factors. Data were analyzed from April 2018 to September 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Any complications, serious complication, discharge not to home, 30-day emergency department utilization, and 30-day readmission. Episode-of-care spending was calculated for these outcomes. Results: This study included 22 664 patients (median [interquartile range] age, 55 [44-64] years; 10 496 [46.3%] women) undergoing VIHR with identified significant preoperative risk factors. Fourth-quartile body mass index (BMI), calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared and defined as a mean (SD) BMI of 43 (6), was associated with increased risk of any complication (odds ratio [OR], 1.64; 95% CI, 1.30-2.06; P < .001) and serious complication (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.22-2.31; P = .002). Insulin-dependent diabetes was associated with increased risk of any complication (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.03-1.73; P = .03), serious complication (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.08-2.12; P = .02), discharge not to home (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.12-1.98; P = .005), and 30-day readmission (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.32-2.14; P < .001). Median (interquartile range) additional episode spending for any complication was $9934 ($9224-$11 851), of which $1304 ($1208-$1552) was attributable to fourth-quartile BMI. Median (interquartile range) additional episode spending for a serious complication was $26 648 ($20 632-$33 166), of which $3638 ($2827-$4544) was attributable to fourth-quartile BMI, $650 ($495-$796) was attributable to insulin-dependent diabetes, and $567 ($433-$696) was attributable to unhealthy alcohol use. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, modifiable risk factors, such as obesity, insulin-dependent diabetes, and unhealthy alcohol use, were associated with adverse outcomes after VIHR. These factors were significantly associated with increased health care spending; therefore, preoperative optimization may improve outcomes and decrease episode-of-care costs.

Validation and Extension of the Ventral Hernia Repair Cost Prediction Model.

BACKGROUND: Repair of ventral and incisional hernias remains a costly challenge for health care systems. In a previous study of a single surgeon's elective open ventral hernia repair (VHR) practice, a cost model was developed, which predicted over 70% of hospital cost variation. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the ventral hernia cost model with multiple surgeons' elective open VHR cases and extending to include nonelective and laparoscopic VHR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: With the University of Kentucky Institutional Review Board approval, elective and emergent cases of open and laparoscopic VHR performed by multiple surgeons over 3 y were identified. Perioperative variables were obtained from the local American College of Surgeons National Surgery Quality Improvement Program database and electronic medical record review. Hospital cost data were obtained from the hospital cost accounting system. Forward multivariable regression of log-transformed costs identified independent cost drivers (P for entry < 0.05, and P for exit > 0.10). RESULTS: Of the 387 VHRs, 74% were open repairs; mean age was 55 y, and 52% of patients were female. For open, elective cases (n = 211; mean cost of $19,145), the previously reported six-factor cost model predicted 45% of the total cost variation. With all VHRs included, additional variables were found to independently drive costs, predicting 59% of the total cost variation from the base cost. The biggest cost drivers were inpatient status (+$1013), use of biologic mesh (+$1131), preoperative systemic inflammatory response syndrome/sepsis (+$894), and preoperative open wound (+$786). CONCLUSIONS: Ventral hernia repair cost variability is predictable. Understanding the independent drivers of cost may be helpful in controlling costs and in negotiating appropriate reimbursement with payers.

Management of Reducible Ventral Hernias: Clinical Outcomes and Cost-effectiveness of Repair at Diagnosis Versus Watchful Waiting.

OBJECTIVE: To compare long-term clinical and economic outcomes associated with 3 management strategies for reducible ventral hernia: repair at diagnosis (open or laparoscopic) and watchful waiting. BACKGROUND: There is variability in ventral hernia management. Recent data suggest watchful waiting is safe; however, long-term clinical and economic outcomes for different management strategies remain unknown. METHODS: We built a state-transition microsimulation model to forecast outcomes for individuals with reducible ventral hernia, simulating a cohort of 1 million individuals for each strategy. We derived cohort characteristics (mean age 58 years, 63% female), hospital costs, and perioperative mortality from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2003-2011), and additional probabilities, costs, and utilities from the literature. Outcomes included prevalence of any repair, emergent repair, and recurrence; lifetime costs; quality-adjusted life years (QALYs); and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. We performed stochastic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to identify parameter thresholds that affect optimal management, using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY. RESULTS: With watchful waiting, 39% ultimately required repair (14% emergent) and 24% recurred. Seventy per cent recurred with repair at diagnosis. Laparoscopic repair at diagnosis was cost-effective compared with open repair at diagnosis (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio $27,700/QALY). The choice of operative strategy (open vs laparoscopic) was sensitive to cost and postoperative quality of life. When perioperative mortality exceeded 5.2% or yearly recurrence exceeded 19.2%, watchful waiting became preferred. CONCLUSIONS: Ventral hernia repair at diagnosis is very cost-effective. The choice between open and laparoscopic repair depends on surgical costs and postoperative quality of life. In patients with high risk of perioperative mortality or recurrence, watchful waiting is preferred.

[Hybrid repair of postoperative ventral hernia]. / Gibridnaia metodika lecheniia posleoperatsionnoi ventral'noi gryzhi.

AIM: To develop new technique of abdominal wall repair for postoperative ventral hernia without disadvantages which are intrinsic for open and laparoscopic surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Combined open and laparoscopic hernia repair was used in 18 patients with postoperative ventral hernia. Open stage provided safe dissection of abdominal adhesions and defect closure by autoplasty, laparoscopic procedure consisted of prosthesis deployment without separation of abdominal wall layers. Two types of composite endoprostheses with anti-adhesive coating were used for abdominal wall repair. RESULTS: There were no cases of recurrence or infectious complications in long-term period (from 3 to 106 months). CONCLUSION: Hybrid repair of postoperative ventral hernia is safe and effective procedure. Further studies are necessary to assess cost-effectiveness ratio of this method in view of expensive composite endoprostheses and laparoscopic supplies.

The State of Prophylactic Mesh Augmentation.

Prophylactic mesh augmentation (PMA) is the implantation of mesh during closure of an index laparotomy to decrease a patient's risk for developing incisional hernia (IH). The current body of evidence lacks refined guidelines for patient selection, mesh placement, and material choice. The purpose of this study is to summarize the literature and identify areas of research needed to foster responsible and appropriate use of PMA as an emerging technique. We conducted a comprehensive review of Scopus, Cochrane, PubMed, and clinicaltrials.gov for articles and trials related to using PMA for IH risk reduction. We further supplemented our review by including select papers on patient-reported outcomes, cost utility, risk modeling, surgical techniques, and available materials highly relevant to PMA. Five-hundred-fifty-one unique articles and 357 trials were reviewed. Multiple studies note a significant decrease in IH incidence with PMA compared with primary suture-only-based closure. No multicenter randomized control trial has been conducted in the United States, and only two such trials are currently active worldwide. Evidence exists supporting the use of PMA, with practical cost utility and models for selecting high-risk patients, but standard PMA guidelines are lacking. Although Europe has progressed with this technique, widespread adoption of PMA requires large-scale pragmatic randomized control trial research, strong evidence-based guidelines, current procedural terminology coding, and resolution of several barriers.

Risk-Assessment Score and Patient Optimization as Cost Predictors for Ventral Hernia Repair.

BACKGROUND: Ventral hernia repair (VHR) is associated with complications that significantly increase healthcare costs. This study explores the associations between hospital costs for VHR and surgical complication risk-assessment scores, need for cardiac or pulmonary evaluation, and smoking or obesity counseling. STUDY DESIGN: An IRB-approved retrospective study of patients having undergone open VHR over 3 years was performed. Ventral Hernia Risk Score (VHRS) for surgical site occurrence and surgical site infection, and the Ventral Hernia Working Group grade were calculated for each case. Also recorded were preoperative cardiology or pulmonary evaluations, smoking cessation and weight reduction counseling, and patient goal achievement. Hospital costs were obtained from the cost accounting system for the VHR hospitalization stratified by major clinical cost drivers. Univariate regression analyses were used to compare the predictive power of the risk scores. Multivariable analysis was performed to develop a cost prediction model. RESULTS: The mean cost of index VHR hospitalization was $20,700. Total and operating room costs correlated with increasing CDC wound class, VHRS surgical site infection score, VHRS surgical site occurrence score, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, and Ventral Hernia Working Group (all p < 0.01). The VHRS surgical site infection scores correlated negatively with contribution margin (-280; p < 0.01). Multivariable predictors of total hospital costs for the index hospitalization included wound class, hernia defect size, age, American Society of Anesthesiologists class 3 or 4, use of biologic mesh, and 2+ mesh pieces; explaining 73% of the variance in costs (p < 0.001). Weight optimization significantly reduced direct and operating room costs (p < 0.05). Cardiac evaluation was associated with increased costs. CONCLUSIONS: Ventral hernia repair hospital costs are more accurately predicted by CDC wound class than VHR risk scores. A straightforward 6-factor model predicted most cost variation for VHR.

The trend toward minimally invasive complex abdominal wall reconstruction: is it worth it?

BACKGROUND: Open abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) was previously one of the only methods available to treat complex ventral hernias. We set out to identify the impact of laparoscopy and robotics on our AWR program by performing an economic analysis before and after the institution of minimally invasive AWR. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed inpatient hospital costs and economic factors for a consecutive series of 104 AWR cases that utilized separation of components technique (57 open, 38 laparoscopic, 9 robotic). Patients were placed into two groups by date of procedure. Group 1 (Pre MIS) was July 2012-June 2015 which included 52 open cases. Group 2 (Post MIS) was July 2015-August 2016 which included 52 cases (5 open, 38 laparoscopic, 9 robotic). RESULTS: A total of 104 patients (52 G1 vs. 52 G2) with mean age (54.2 vs. 54.1 years, p = 0.960), BMI (34.7 vs. 32.1 kg/m2, p = 0.059), and ASA score (2.5 vs. 2.3, p = 0.232) were included in this review. Total length of stay (LOS) was significantly shorter for patients in the Post MIS group (5.3 vs. 1.4 days, p < 0.001). Although operating room (OR) supply costs were $1705 higher for the Post MIS group (p = 0.149), total hospital costs were $8628 less when compared to the Pre MIS group (p < 0.001). Multiple linear regressions identified increased BMI (p = 0.021), longer OR times (p = 0.003), and LOS (p < 0.001) as predictors of higher total costs. Factors that were predictive of longer LOS included older patients (p = 0.003) and patients with larger defect areas (p = 0.004). MIS was predictive of shorter hospital stays (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite an increase in operating room supply costs, transition to performing MIS AWR in cases that were previously done through an open approach decreased LOS and translated into significant overall total cost savings.

Concomitant open ventral hernia repair: what is the financial impact of performing open ventral hernia with other abdominal procedures concomitantly?

BACKGROUND: Open ventral hernia repair (VHR) is often performed in conjunction with other abdominal procedures. Clinical outcomes and financial implications of VHR are becoming better understood; however, financial implications of concomitant VHR during other abdominal procedures are unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the financial implications of adding VHR to open abdominal procedures. METHODS: This IRB-approved study retrospectively reviewed hospital costs to 180-day post-discharge of standalone VHRs, isolated open abdominal surgeries (bowel resection or stoma closure, removal of infected mesh, hysterectomy or oophorectomy, panniculectomy or abdominoplasty, open appendectomy or cholecystectomy), performed at our institution from October 1, 2011 to September 30, 2014. The perioperative risk data were obtained from the local National Surgery Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database, and resource utilization data were obtained from the hospital cost accounting system. RESULTS: 345 VHRs, 1389 open abdominal procedures as described, and 104 concomitant open abdominal and VHR cases were analyzed. The VHR-only group had lower ASA Class, shorter operative duration, and a higher percentage of hernias repaired via separation of components than the concomitant group (p < 0.001). The median hospital cost for VHR-alone was $12,900 (IQR: $9500-$20,700). There were significant increases to in-hospital costs when VHR was combined with removing an infected mesh (63%) or with bowel resections or stoma closures (0.7%). The addition of VHR did not cause a significant change in 180-day post-discharge costs for any of the procedures. CONCLUSIONS: This study noted decreased costs when combining VHR with panniculectomy or abdominoplasty and hysterectomy or oophorectomy. For removal of infected mesh and bowel resection or stoma closure, waiting, when feasible, is recommended. Given the impending changes in financial reimbursements in healthcare in the United States, it is prudent that future studies evaluate further the clinical and fiscal benefit of concomitant procedures.

Impact of minimally invasive surgery on healthcare utilization, cost, and workplace absenteeism in patients with Incisional/Ventral Hernia (IVH).

BACKGROUND: Incisional hernia repair is one of the most common general surgery operations being performed today. With the advancement of laparoscopy since the 1990s, we have seen vast improvements in faster return to normal activity, shorter hospital stays and less post-operative narcotic use, to name a few. OBJECTIVE: The key aims of this review were to measure the impact of minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery on health care utilization, cost, and work place absenteeism in the patients undergoing inpatient incisional/ventral hernia (IVH) repair. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters Database. Total of 2557 patients were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Of the patient that underwent IVH surgery, 24.5% (n = 626) were done utilizing minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques and 75.5% (n = 1931) were done open. Ninety-day post-surgery outcomes were significantly lower in the MIS group compared to the open group for total payment ($19,288.97 vs. $21,708.12), inpatient length of stay (3.12 vs. 4.24 days), number of outpatient visit (5.48 vs. 7.35), and estimated days off (11.3 vs. 14.64), respectively. At 365 days post-surgery, the total payment ($27,497.96 vs. $30,157.29), inpatient length of stay (3.70 vs. 5.04 days), outpatient visits (19.75 vs. 23.42), and estimated days off (35.71 vs. 41.58) were significantly lower for MIS group versus the open group, respectively. CONCLUSION: When surgical repair of IVH is performed, there is a clear advantage in the MIS approach versus the open approach in regard to cost, length of stay, number of outpatient visits, and estimated days off.

Hospital wide porcine mesh conversion results in cost savings with equivalent clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: A variety of biologic mesh is available for ventral hernia repair. Despite widely variable costs, there is no data comparing cost of material to clinical outcome. METHODS: Biologic mesh product change was examined. A prospective survey was done to determine appropriate biologic mesh utilization, followed by a retrospective chart review of those treated from Sept. 2012 to Aug. 2013 with Strattice™ and from Sept. 2013 to Aug. 2014 with Permacol™. Outcome variables included complications associated with each material, repair success, and cost difference over the two periods. RESULTS: 28 patients received Strattice™ and 41 Permacol™. There was no statistical difference in patient factors, hernia characteristics, length of stay, readmission rates or surgical site infections at 30 days. The charges were significantly higher for Strattice™ with the median cost $8940 compared to $1600 for Permacol™ (p < 0.001). Permacol™ use resulted in a savings if $181,320. CONCLUSIONS: Permacol™ use resulted in similar clinical outcomes with significant cost savings when compared to Strattice™. Biologic mesh choice should be driven by a combination of clinical outcomes and product cost.

Ventral and incisional hernia: the cost of comorbidities and complications.

INTRODUCTION: Ventral and incisional hernia repair (VIHR) is among the most frequently performed abdominal operations with significant incidence of postoperative complications and readmissions. Payers are targeting increased "value" of care through improved outcomes and reduced costs. Cost data in clinically relevant terms is still rare. This study aims to identify hospital costs associated with clinically relevant factors in order to facilitate strategies by surgeons to enhance the value of VIHR. METHODS: An IRB-approved retrospective review of VIHRs performed at the University of Kentucky from April 2009 through September 2013 was conducted. NSQIP clinical data and hospital cost data were matched. Operating room (ORC), total encounter (TEC), and 90-day postdischarge (90PDC) hospital costs were analyzed relative to clinical variables using non-parametric tests. RESULTS: In total 385 patients that underwent VIHR during the time period were included in the analyses. Considering all VIHRs, median [interquartile range (IQR)] ORC was $6900 ($5600-$10,000); TEC was $10,700 ($7500-$18,600); and 90PDC was $0 ($0-$800). Compared to all VIHRs, ASA Class ≥ 3 was associated with increased ORC and TEC (p < .001), and 90PDC (p < .01). Preoperative open wound was associated with increased ORC and TEC (p < .001). Numerous operative variables were associated with both increased ORC and TEC. Wound Class > 1 was associated with increased ORC and TEC (p < .001) and 90PDC (p < .01). Inpatient occurrence of any complication was associated with increased TEC and 90PDC (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: ASA Class ≥ 3, Wound Class > 1, open abdominal wound, and postoperative complications significantly increase costs. Although the hospital encounter represents the majority of the cost associated with VIHR, additional costs are incurred during the 90-day postoperative period. An appreciation of global costs is essential in developing alternative payment models for hernia in order to provide the greatest value in hernia care.

Standard laparoscopic versus robotic retromuscular ventral hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) demonstrates comparable recurrence rates, but lower incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) than open repair. Delayed complications can occur with intraperitoneal mesh, particularly if a subsequent abdominal operation is required, potentially resulting in bowel injury. Robotic retromuscular ventral hernia repair (RRVHR) allows abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) and extraperitoneal mesh placement previously only possible with open repair, with the wound morbidity of LVHR. METHODS: All LVHR and RRVHR performed in our institution between June 2013 and May 2015 contained in the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative database were analyzed. Continuous bivariate analysis was performed with Student's t test. Continuous nonparametric data were compared with Chi-squared test, or Fisher's exact for small sample sizes. p values <0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: We compared 103 LVHR with 53 RRVHR. LVHR patients were older (60.2 vs. 52.9 years; p = 0.001), but demographics were otherwise similar between groups. Hernia width was similar (6.9 vs. 6.5 cm, p = 0.508). Fascial closure was achieved more often with RRVHR (96.2 vs. 50.5 %; p < 0.001) and aided by myofascial release in 43.4 %. Mesh was placed in an intraperitoneal position in 90.3 % of LVHR and extraperitoneal in 96.2 % of RRVHR. RRVHR operative time was longer (245 vs. 122 min, p < 0.001). Narcotic requirement was similar between LVHR and RRVHR (1.8 vs. 1.4 morphine equivalents/h; p = 0.176). Seroma was more common after RRVHR (47.2 vs. 16.5 %, p < 0.001), but SSI was similar (3.8 vs. 1 %, p = 0.592). Median length of stay was shorter after RRVHR (1 vs. 2 days, p = 0.004). Direct hospital cost was similar (LVHR $13,943 vs. RRVHR $19,532; p = 0.07). CONCLUSION: RRVHR enables true AWR, with myofascial release to offset tension for midline fascial closure, and obviates the need for intraperitoneal mesh. Perioperative morbidity of RRVHR is comparable to LVHR, with shorter length of stay despite a longer operative time and extensive tissue dissection.

The cost of preventable comorbidities on wound complications in open ventral hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Patients with complex ventral hernias may benefit from preoperative optimization. This study evaluates the financial impact of preventable comorbidities (PCM) in elective open ventral hernia repair. METHODS: In this single institution prospectively collected data from 2007-2011, hospital charges (included all hernia-related visits, interventions, or readmissions) and wound-related complications in patients with PCM-diabetes, tobacco use, and obesity-were compared to patients without such risks using standard statistical methods. RESULTS: Within the study period, there were 118 patients with no PCM; of those, 33 had complications, and 85 did not. In the 131 patients with two or more PCM, 81 had complications; 89 of 251 patients had complications in the group with only 1 PCM; groups with PCM were significantly more likely to have complications compared to the no PCM group (62% versus 35.4% versus 28%, P < 0.05). The majority of the patient population was female (57.2%) with a mean age of 57.8 y (range, 22-84 ys), and median defect size was 150 cm2 (interquartile range, 50-283 cm2). Body mass index was higher in PCM group with complications than in PCM without complications (40 versus 36 kg/m2, P < 0.05). For patients with complications, the average hospital charges were $80,660 in the PCM group compared to $55,444 in the no PCM group (P = 0.038). Hospital charges in those with PCM without complications compared to no PCM with complications were equivalent ($65,453 versus $55,444, P = 0.55). Even when no complications occurred, patients with PCM incurred higher charges than No PCM for inpatient ($61,269 versus $31,236, P < 0.02), outpatient ($4,185 versus $552, P < 0.04), and total hospital charges ($65,453 versus $31,788, P ≤ 0.001). Those patients without complications but with a single PCM incurred larger charges than those with no PCM during follow-up ($3578 versus $552, P = 0.04), but there was no difference in hospital or overall total charges (P > 0.05). Interestingly, patients without complications, both hospital ($38,333 versus $61,269, P = 0.02) and total charges ($41,911 versus $65,453, P = 0.01) were increased for patients with 2+ PCM compared to those with only a single PCM. If complications occurred, no difference between the single PCM group compared to the two or more PCM groups existed for hospital, follow-up, or overall charges (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PCM undergoing open ventral hernia repair are more likely to have complications than patients without comorbidities. Patients with PCM generate higher hospital charges than those without PCM even when no complications occur; furthermore, the more PCM, the patient has the more significant the impact. Interestingly, patients with multiple PCM and no complications had equivalent hospital costs compared to patients with no PCM and with complications. Aggressive risk reduction may translate into significant savings. Preoperative preparation of patients before elective surgery is indicated.

Biologic mesh in ventral hernia repair: Outcomes, recurrence, and charge analysis.

BACKGROUND: Biologic mesh choice in ventral hernia repair is challenging due to lack of prospective data. This study examines long-term, single-center biologic mesh outcomes. METHODS: Prospective operative outcomes data was queried for open ventral hernia repair with biologic mesh. Univariate and multivariate analysis were used to compare mesh outcomes. RESULTS: In the study, 223 patients underwent open ventral hernia repair with biologic mesh, including 40 with Alloderm, 23 AlloMax, 70 FlexHD, 68 Strattice, and 22 Xenmatrix. Overall, 9.8% had an American Society of Anesthesiology classification of 4, 54.6% with a classification of 3, and 35.6% with a classification of 1 or 2. Operative time averaged 241 minutes with estimated blood loss of 202 mL. Hernia defects averaged 257 ± 245 cm2 with mesh size 384 cm2. Biologic mesh was used as a fascial bridge in 19.6%, component separation was performed in 47.5%, and 82% had concomitant procedure. Inpatient mortality was 1.4%. Hernia recurrence varied significantly by mesh type: 35% Alloderm, 34.5% AlloMax, 37.1% FlexHD, 14.7% Strattice, and 59.1% Xenmatrix (P = .001). The mean follow-up was 18.2 months. After multivariate analysis comparing to Strattice, AlloMax had a 3.4 higher odds ratio for recurrence, FlexHD a 2.9 odds ratio, and Xenmatrix a 7.8 odds ratio. The rate of mesh infections requiring explantation was <1%. Total hospital charges averaged $131,004 ± $143,320. Mean charges varied significantly between meshes; Xenmatrix was the most expensive and AlloMax was the least expensive (P < .05). CONCLUSION: In 223 ventral hernia repair performed with biologic mesh at a tertiary care institution, Strattice, a porcine acellular dermal mesh, had significantly lower odds of hernia recurrence compared with AlloMax, FlexHD, and Xenmatrix. Choice of biologic mesh affects long-term postoperative outcomes in ventral hernia repair.