ArticleUpdates in surgery2024
Laparoscopic assisted colectomy versus laparoscopic complete colectomy: a cost analysis.
Article in Updates in surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
To compare the short-term outcomes and explore the potential economic benefits of laparoscopic-assisted colectomy with extracorporeal anastomosis (LAC/EA) vs. laparoscopic complete colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis (LCC/IA) for patients with non-metastatic resectable colon cancer. Data of patients who underwent laparoscopic hemicolectomy from January 2017 to March 2023 were collected and analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) analyses was carried out to minimize the selection bias. Before PSM, a total of 113 patients met the inclusion criteria (39 in the LCC/IA vs. 74 in the LAC/EA). Clinicopathologic characteristics were comparable except for the median number of removed lymph nodes (P = 0.023). LCC/IA was associated with longer operative time, less intraoperative blood loss, and shorter incision length. The rate of 30-day postoperative complications was similar, but the time to first flatus and soft diet was shorter in the LCC/IA. No deaths were reported in either group within 30 days after surgery. Costs of surgical instruments (25,945.8 ± 1,918.0 vs. 23,551.9 ± 2,665.5 RMB; P < 0.01) were higher for the LCC/IA but overall costs were similar (LCC/IA, 43,220.0 ± 4,954.0 vs. LAC/EA, 41,269.2 ± 6,685.9 RMB; P = 0.112). After PSM, 38 patients in the LCC/IA and 63 patients in the LAC/EA were compared. LCC/IA was superior in terms of intraoperative blood loss, incision length, and postoperative functional recovery. There was an extra charge of 2385.0 RMB regarding surgical instruments in the LCC/IA but the overall cost did not reach statistical significance. LCC/IA is a feasible, safe, and cost-effective surgical treatment for patients with non-metastatic resectable colon 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.