Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20835717›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2011

The impact of surgeon choice on the cost of performing laparoscopic appendectomy.

Thomas Chu, Ryan A Chandhoke, Paul C Smith, Steven D Schwaitzberg

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04226482 (Comparison of Lateral Thermal Damage and Clinical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Appendectomy With New Versus Reused Ultrasonic Scalpel in Patients With Acute Appendicitis - Randomized Clinical Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04226482 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of Lateral Thermal Damage and Clinical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Appendectomy With New Versus Reused Ultrasonic Scalpel in Patients With Acute Appendicitis - Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Split, School of MedicineRan2019 to 2020Enrolled100ConditionsAppendicitis Acute, Safety Issues, Complication of Surgical Procedure, Device Induced InjuryArmsNew Device, Used Device
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Transvaginal endoscopic surgery for tubal ectopic pregnancy.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
    Trial
  3. Laparoscopic appendectomy, stump closure and endoloops: A meta-analysis.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Effect of hospital volume on outcomes of laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: an observational study.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2015
    Observational
  15. Article
  16. Acute appendicitis: position paper, WSES, 2013.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2014
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Appendectomy in Germany-an analysis of a nationwide survey 2011/2012.International journal of colorectal disease · 2013
    Article
  20. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis in children.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2012
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Thomas ChuTufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Ryan A Chandhoke
Paul C Smith
Steven D Schwaitzberg
Tufts University · USCambridge Health Alliance · USHarvard University · US

Funding

Physically Realistic Virtual SurgeryR01EB005807 · NIBIB · RENSSELAER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE · PI DE, SUVRANU, JACKSON, CULLEN DAVIS · 2006 to 2024
$7.0M
Developing Physics-Based Virtual Simulation Technology for Natural Orifice TranslR01EB009362 · NIBIB · RENSSELAER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE · PI CAO, CAROLINE GL, DE, SUVRANU · 2011 to 2014
$2.6M
Developing a Virtual Basic Laparoscopic Skill Trainer (VBLaST)R01EB010037 · NIBIB · RENSSELAER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE · PI CAO, CAROLINE GL, DE, SUVRANU · 2010 to 2013
$2.0M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB009362NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB010037
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWhile laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) can be performed using a myriad of techniques, the cost of each method varies. The purpose of this study is to analyze the effects of surgeon choice of technique on the cost of key steps in LA.

methodsSurgeon operative notes, hospital invoice lists, and surgeon instrumentation preference sheets were obtained for all LA cases in 2008 at Cambridge Health Alliance (CHA). Only cases (N = 89) performed by fulltime staff general surgeons (N = 8) were analyzed. Disposable costs were calculated for the following components of LA: port access, mesoappendix division, and management of the appendiceal stump. The actual cost of each disposable was determined based on the hospital's materials management database. Actual hospital reimbursements for LA in 2008 were obtained for all payers and compared with the disposable cost per case.

resultsDisposable cost per case for the three portions analyzed for 126 theoretical models were calculated and found to range from US $81 to US $873. The surgeon with the most cost-effective preferred method (US $299) utilized one multi-use endoscopic clip applier for mesoappendix division, two commercially available pretied loops for management of the appendiceal stump, and three 5-mm trocars as their preferred technique. The surgeon with the least cost-effective preferred method (US $552) utilized two staple firings for mesoappendix division, one staple firing for management of the appendiceal stump, and 12/5/10-mm trocars for access. The two main payers for LA patients were Medicaid and Health Safety Net, whose total hospital reimbursements ranged from US $264 to US $504 and from US $0 to US $545 per case, respectively, for patients discharged on day 1. DISCUSSION: Disposable costs frequently exceeded hospital reimbursements. Currently, there is no scientific literature that clearly illustrates a superior surgical method for performing these portions of LA in routine cases. This study suggests that surgeons should review the cost implications of their practice and to find ways to provide the most cost-effective care without jeopardizing clinical outcome.

Indexed as

General SurgeryAppendectomyAppendicitisChoice BehaviorCost-Benefit AnalysisCost SavingsDisposable EquipmentDissectionHumansInsurance, Health, ReimbursementLaparoscopyMassachusettsMedicaidMedical AssistanceMedically UninsuredPractice Patterns, Physicians'

Identifiers

PMID20835717
OpenAlexW2085124091

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.