Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30039449›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2018

A Comparison of Open and Minimally Invasive Surgery for Hepatic and Pancreatic Resections Among the Medicare Population.

Qinyu Chen, Katiuscha Merath, Fabio Bagante, Ozgur Akgul, Mary Dillhoff, Jordan Cloyd, Timothy M Pawlik

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Economic analysis of open versus laparoscopic versus robotic hepatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Medicare Reimbursement Trends in Zenker's Diverticulectomy.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. In-hospital Mortality Following Pancreatoduodenectomy: a Comprehensive Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020
    Article
  10. Observational
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Qinyu ChenDivision of Surgical Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Katiuscha MerathDivision of Surgical Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Fabio BaganteDivision of Surgical Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Ozgur AkgulDivision of Surgical Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Mary DillhoffDivision of Surgical Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Jordan CloydDivision of Surgical Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Timothy M PawlikDivision of Surgical Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA. tim.pawlik@osumc.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-4828-8096
The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center · USUniversity of Verona · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMinimally invasive surgery (MIS) has become standard of care for many gastrointestinal surgical procedures. Despite possible clinical benefits, MIS may be underutilized in some populations. The aim of this study was to access the utilization of MIS among Medicare patients undergoing hepatopancreatic procedures and define clinical outcomes, as well as costs, of minimally invasive techniques compared with the conventional open approach.

methodsThe Medicare Provider Analysis and Review (MEDPAR) Inpatient Files were reviewed to identify Medicare patients who underwent pancreatic and liver procedures between 2013 and 2015. Primary outcomes of the analysis included perioperative clinical outcomes such as rates of complications, index hospitalization length-of-stay (LOS), failure-to-rescue, rates, and causes of 90-day readmission, as well as 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were Medicare payments for index hospitalization and readmission. Multivariable logistic regression was used to investigate the impact of MIS on clinical outcomes and health expenditures.

resultsA total of 13,716 (90.6%) patients underwent open resection, while MIS was performed in 1424 (9.4%) patients. LOS was shorter among patients undergoing MIS (mean 7.3 ± SD 7.3) versus open (mean 9.3 ± SD 9.1) surgery (p < 0.001). The incidence of perioperative complications was lower following MIS (open 25.5%, n = 3492 vs. MIS 17.2%, n = 245) (p < 0.001). Rates of failure-to-rescue were similar among patients undergoing an open versus MIS pancreatic procedure (open 19.4%, n = 271 vs. MIS 13.4%, n = 17) (p = 0.09). In contrast, 90-day readmission (open 31.1%, n = 1630 vs. MIS 24.1%, n = 201, p < 0.001), as well as 90-day mortality (open 7.7%, n = 404 vs. MIS 4.2%, n = 35, p < 0.001) were lower among patients undergoing pancreatic resections via an MIS approach. In contrast, failure-to-rescue and readmission, as well as mortality, were all comparable among patients undergoing a liver resection, regardless as to whether the operation was performed open or via an MIS approach (all p > 0.05). Mean total payments for open pancreatic surgery were on average $1421 higher in the open versus MIS pancreatic group (p = 0.01); in contrast, there was no difference in the overall payment for hepatic resection (p > 0.05).

conclusionThe MIS approach was underutilized among patients undergoing liver and pancreatic procedures. MIS was associated with lower complication and readmission and shorter LOS, as well as comparable/slightly lower Medicare payments, compared with the open approach. The MIS approach should strongly be considered among older patients undergoing liver and pancreatic procedures.

Indexed as

AgedCosts and Cost AnalysisFemaleHepatectomyHospitalizationHumansLength of StayLiverMaleMedicareMiddle AgedMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresPancreasPancreatectomyTreatment OutcomeUnited StatesHepatectomyMedicareMinimally invasive surgeryPancreatectomy

Identifiers

PMID30039449
OpenAlexW2883435336

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.