ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2024
Cost Analysis and Financial Implications of a Peritoneal Surface Malignancy Program in the USA.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Is cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC adequately funded?]Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Defining a 'cells to society' research framework for appendiceal tumours.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2025Review
- When Benchmarks Fail Us: A Case Study in Cytoreductive Surgery.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC), Oncological Outcomes and Long-Term Survival among Patients with Gastric Cancer and Limited Peritoneal Disease Progression after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to describe the financial implications of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) in the USA. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cost analysis of 100 CRS/HIPEC procedures to examine the impact of patient and procedural factors on hospital costs and reimbursement. A comparison of surgeons' work relative value units (wRVUs) between CRS/HIPEC and a representative sample of complex surgical oncology procedures was made to assess the physicians' compensation rate. Univariable and multivariable backward logistic regression was used to analyze the association between perioperative variables and high direct cost (HDCs).
resultsThe median direct cost per CRS/HIPEC procedure was US $44,770. The median hospital reimbursement was US $43,066, while professional reimbursement was US $8608, resulting in a positive contribution margin of US $7493/procedure. However, the contribution margin significantly varied with the payer mix. Privately insured patients had a positive median contribution margin of US $23,033, whereas Medicare-insured patients had a negative contribution margin of US $13,034. Length of stay (LOS) had the most significant association with HDC, and major complications had the most significant association with LOS. Finally, CRS/HIPEC procedures generated a median of 13 wRVU/h, which is significantly lower than the wRVU/h generated by open pancreatoduodenectomies, open gastrectomies, and hepatectomies. However, higher operation complexity and multiple visceral resections help compensate for the relatively low wRVU/h.
conclusionsCRS/HIPEC is an expensive operation, and prolonged LOS has the most significant impact on the total cost of the procedure. High-quality care is essential to improve patient outcomes and maintain the economic sustainability of the procedure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37903950What 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.