ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2025
Cost analysis of laparoscopic total versus open total gastrectomy in gastric cancer.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2025. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDespite ongoing discussions concerning clinical equivalence of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) compared to open total gastrectomy (OTG) in gastric cancer (GC) surgery, complementary evidence regarding financial implications is sparse. The aim of this study was to compare hospital associated expenses and perioperative outcomes between both approaches.
methodsClinicopathological and financial data from 80 consecutive GC patients undergoing LTG or OTG between 2015 and 2022 were investigated. Patient baseline characteristics, perioperative results, long-term outcomes and financial expenses up to 30 days after discharge were compared. A binary logistic regression model to identify individual cost drivers was performed.
resultsLTG was associated with significantly prolonged operating time (281 min vs. 245 min, p < 0.02). However, LTG demonstrated a trend towards lower total (18,708 € vs. 22,810 €, p = 0.11) and median daily (1,516 € vs. 1,721 €, p = 0.25) expenses, yet not reaching statistical significance. Decreased ICU costs emerged as the greatest single cost reducer in LTG (962 € vs. 2,147 €, p = 0.10). Hospital length of stay ≥ 15 days was the only independent cost driver for increased expenses (HR [95% CI] = 13,2 [3.0-58.9], p < 0.01). Ultimately, patients undergoing LTG and OTG demonstrated similar outcomes in terms of perioperative morbidity (n = 8, 13% vs. n = 3, 17%, p = 0.70), median number of resected lymph nodes (n = 32 vs. n = 33, p = 0.72), absence of 90-day mortality, and long-term survival (p = 0.47).
conclusionAlthough typically involving longer operating times, LTG tends to be linked with decreased hospital costs, yet not reaching statistical significance. The ongoing establishment of LTG seems not to pose additional financial burdens for surgical departments.
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.