ArticleSurgical endoscopy2017
A new perspective on the value of minimally invasive colorectal surgery-payer, provider, and patient benefits.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07264764 (Evaluation of Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter, Cerebral Oxygen Saturation and Cognitive Functions in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Abdominal Surgeries; Prospective Observational Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Evaluation of Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter, Cerebral Oxygen Saturation and Cognitive Functions in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Abdominal Surgeries; Prospective Observational Study
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Financial burden of postoperative complications following colonic resection: A systematic review.Medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Conversion to open following a minimally invasive surgical attempt in inflammatory bowel disease is not associated with increased morbidity compared to a planned open approach.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- A retrospective analysis of early discharge following minimally invasive colectomy in an enhanced recovery pathway.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- [Impact of the Nursing Personnel Strengthening Act on minimally invasive surgery exemplified by right-sided hemicolectomy from an economic perspective].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2022Article
- Postoperative Use of Biologics was Less Common among Patients with Crohn's Disease With Emergent/Urgent Versus Elective Intestinal Resection.Gastro hep advances · 2022Article
- The use of emergency laparoscopy for acute abdomen in the elderly: the FRAILESEL Italian Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.Updates in surgery · 2020Article
- Access to common laparoscopic general surgical procedures: do racial disparities exist?Surgical endoscopy · 2020Article
- Observational
- Article
- A National study on the adoption of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in the elderly population: current state and value proposition.Techniques in coloproctology · 2019Article
- Cost of benign versus oncologic colon resection among fee-for-service Medicare enrollees.Journal of surgical oncology · 2019Article
- The cost of conversion in robotic and laparoscopic colorectal surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2018Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe clinical benefits of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) are proven, but overall financial benefits are not fully explored. Our goal was to evaluate the financial benefits of MIS from the payer's perspective to demonstrate the value of minimally invasive colorectal surgery.
methodsA Truven MarketScan
resultsA total of 4615 colectomies were included-2054 (44.5 %) open and 2561 (55.5 %) MIS. Total allowed episode costs were significantly lower MIS than open ($37,540 vs. $45,284, p < 0.001). During the inpatient stay, open cases had significantly greater ICU utilization (3.9 % open vs. 2.0 % MIS, p < 0.001), higher overall complications (52.8 % open vs. 32.3 % MIS, p < 0.001), higher colorectal-specific complications (32.5 % open vs. 17.9 % MIS, p < 0.001), longer LOS (6.39 open vs. 4.44 days MIS, p < 0.001), and higher index admission costs ($39,585 open vs. $33,183 MIS, p < 0.001). Post-discharge, open cases had significantly higher readmission rates/100 cases (11.54 vs. 8.28; p = 0.0013), higher average readmission costs ($3055 vs. $2,514; p = 0.1858), and greater 30-day healthcare costs than MIS ($5699 vs. $4357; p = 0.0033). The net episode cost of care was $7744/patient greater for an open colectomy, even with similar DRG distribution.
conclusionsIn a commercially insured population, the risk-adjusted allowed costs for MIS colectomy episodes were significantly lower than open. The overall cost difference between MIS and open was almost $8000 per patient. This highlights an opportunity for health plans and employers to realize financial benefits by shifting from open to MIS for colectomy. With increasing bundled payment arrangements and accountable care sharing programs, the cost impact of shifting from open to MIS introduces an opportunity for cost savings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.