Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29417163›Full record

ArticleDer Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen2018

[Profit center analysis of esophagectomy : Economical analysis of transthoracic esophagectomy depending on postoperative complications].

C T Baltin, M Bludau, F Kron, T Zander, M Hallek, A H Hölscher, W Schröder

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Economic Burden of Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy Compared to Alternative Therapy Methods in Patients with Anastomotic Leakage After Esophagectomy.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Does VOIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
    Article
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

C T BaltinKlinik und Poliklinik für Allgemein‑, Viszeral- und Tumorchirurgie, Uniklinik Köln, Kerpener Str. 62, 50931, Köln, Deutschland.
M BludauKlinik und Poliklinik für Allgemein‑, Viszeral- und Tumorchirurgie, Uniklinik Köln, Kerpener Str. 62, 50931, Köln, Deutschland.
F KronKlinik I für Innere Medizin, Uniklinik Köln, Köln, Deutschland.
T ZanderKlinik I für Innere Medizin, Uniklinik Köln, Köln, Deutschland.
M HallekKlinik I für Innere Medizin, Uniklinik Köln, Köln, Deutschland.
A H HölscherZentrum für Speiseröhren- und Magenchirurgie, Agaplesion Markus Krankenhaus Frankfurt, Wilhelm-Epstein-Str. 4, 60431, Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland. arnulf.hoelscher@uk-koeln.de.
W SchröderKlinik und Poliklinik für Allgemein‑, Viszeral- und Tumorchirurgie, Uniklinik Köln, Kerpener Str. 62, 50931, Köln, Deutschland. wolfgang.schroeder@uk-koeln.de.
Centrum für Integrierte Onkologie · DEKlinik und Poliklinik für Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie · DEAgaplesion Markus Hospital · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Due to increasing medical costs and yet limited financial resources, medical treatment and economic analyses can no longer be separated; therefore, direct costing and cost unit accounting become more and more relevant as controlling tools in hospital management. Transthoracic esophagectomy is an integral part of the current treatment concept in patients with esophageal carcinoma. The question of the present study was whether the present diagnosis-related groups (DRG) system is a cost-effective tool to represent transthoracic esophagectomy. In this retrospective study at a high-volume center, 161 consecutive patients with esophageal carcinoma were included. All patients were surgically treated according to the current S3 guidelines by a transthoracic esophagectomy. Detailed and standardized documentation of the postoperative complications was made according to the classification of Clavien-Dindo and the guidelines of the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG). For each individual patient, the respective actual costs were analyzed according to the Institute for the Remuneration System in Hospitals (InEK) cost accounting approach comparing DRG payments (DRG G03A) on a case level including all extra fees per DRG catalogue. The mean costs per case of all included 161 patients were 24,338 € (median: 19,210 €, range: 12,149-127,376 €), while mean payments per case of 22,591 € were recorded. For the entire study population, the profit margin was -281,330 € (mean: -1747 €). Only patients with an uncomplicated course (Clavien-Dindo 0) yielded a slightly positive profit margin of 2514 €. With increasing complication score the profit margin became increasingly negative (Clavien-Dindo I: -2878 €, Clavien-Dindo IVb: -58,543 €). Within the analysis of the InEK target cost matrix, main cost drivers can be identified as medical services (22.3%) and non-medical infrastructure (18.7%). Surgical treatment according to the existing guidelines of patients with esophageal carcinoma is not cost-covering in high-volume centers and cannot be solely financed by existing DRG revenues.

Indexed as

Esophageal NeoplasmsEsophagectomyHealth Care CostsPostoperative ComplicationsDiagnosis-Related GroupsHumansRetrospective StudiesDRG costs per caseEsophageal cancerPostoperative complicationsProfit center analysisTransthoracic esophagectomy

Identifiers

PMID29417163
OpenAlexW2794002237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.