ArticleMedicine2020
Laparoscopic vs open colorectal surgery: Economic and clinical outcomes in the Brazilian healthcare.
Article in Medicine, 2020. 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating multimodal prehabilitation into enhanced recovery after surgery programs (MPhERAS) for elderly patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of Perioperative, Oncologic, and Functional Outcomes Following Robotic and Laparoscopic Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Laparoscopic vs. Robotic Approaches-A Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Feasibility of the caudal tunneling with lateral colonic attachment preservation procedure in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for ileocecal tuberculosis: a prospective cohort study.Annals of coloproctology · 2026Article
- ERAS protocol vs. conventional care in elective laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in Hatyai Hospital.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Short-Term Outcomes of First 100 Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgeries at a Newly Developed Surgical Setup at Peshawar.Cureus · 2024Article
- Enhancing recovery and reducing inflammation: the impact of enhanced recovery after surgery recommendations on inflammatory markers in laparoscopic surgery-a scoping review.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Article
- Perioperative outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- Isolated diffuse intestinal ganglioneuromatosis presented as a redundant sigmoid colon: a case report.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
- Advantage of laparoscopic surgery in patients with generalized obesity operated for colorectal malignancy: A retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Laparoscopic surgery has become the preferred surgical approach of several colorectal conditions. However, the economic results of this are quite controversial. The degree of adoption of laparoscopic technology, as well as the aptitude of the surgeons, can have an influence not only in the clinical outcomes but also in the total procedure cost. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and economic outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgeries, compared to open procedures in Brazil.All patients who underwent elective colorectal surgeries between January 2012 and December 2013 were eligible to the retrospective cohort. The considered follow-up period was within 30 days from the index procedure. The outcomes evaluated were the length of stay, blood transfusion, intensive care unit admission, in-hospital mortality, use of antibiotics, the development of anastomotic leakage, readmission, and the total hospital costs including re-admissions.Two hundred eighty patients, who met the eligibility criteria, were included in the analysis. Patients in the laparoscopic group had a shorter length of stay in comparison with the open group (6.02 ± 3.86 vs 9.86 ± 16.27, P < .001). There were no significant differences in other clinical outcomes between the 2 groups. The total costs were similar between the 2 groups, in the multivariate analysis (generalized linear model ratio of means 1.20, P = .074). The cost predictors were the cancer diagnosis and age.Laparoscopic colorectal surgery presents a 17% decrease in the duration of the hospital stay without increasing the total hospitalization costs. The factors associated with increased hospital costs were age and the diagnosis of cancer.
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.