Laparoscopic vs. open surgery for acute adhesive small-bowel obstruction

Patients' outcome and cost-effectiveness

M. Khaikin, N. Schneidereit, S. Cera, D. Sands, Jonathan Efron, E. G. Weiss, J. J. Nogueras, A. M. Vernava, S. D. Wexner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Numerous studies have demonstrated the feasibility of laparoscopy in the management of acute adhesive small-bowel obstruction (AASBO). However, comparative data with laparotomy are lacking. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopy and laparotomy for the treatment of AASBO in terms of patient outcome and cost-effectiveness. Methods: A retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent surgery for AASBO from 1999 to 2005 was conducted. Data recorded included operative and postoperative course, among others. Operative and total hospital charges were estimated from the Patient Accounting System. Results: Thirty-one patients who underwent laparoscopy were matched to a similar group of patients who underwent laparotomy. In the laparoscopy group, four patients (13%) had a laparoscopy-assisted procedure and ten patients (32%) were converted. The laparoscopy group was subdivided into laparoscopy, laparoscopy-assisted, converted, and assisted-converted subgroups. In the majority of the patients, AASBO was secondary to a single band. Overall morbidity was significantly higher in the laparotomy group (p = 0.007). Morbidity rates were statistically significant between the laparoscopy and assisted-converted subgroups (p = 0.0001) but not between the laparotomy group and assisted-converted subgroup (p = 0.19). Median hospital stay and median time to first bowel movement were significantly shorter in the laparoscopy group. Charge data were available for only the last three years of the study. Operative charges and total hospital charges were similar between the laparoscopy and the laparotomy groups (p = 0.14 and p = 0.10, respectively). There was a significant difference in total hospital charges between the laparoscopy subgroup and laparotomy group (p = 0.03). Conclusions: Laparoscopy for AASBO is associated with reduced hospital stay, early recovery, and decreased morbidity. Laparoscopy-assisted and converted surgeries do not differ significantly from laparotomy in regard to patient outcome. Operative and total hospital charges are similar for both laparoscopy and laparotomy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)742-746
Number of pages5
JournalSurgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques
Volume21
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2007
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Adhesives
Laparoscopy
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Laparotomy
Hospital Charges
Morbidity
Length of Stay

Keywords

  • Adhesions
  • Cost-effectiveness
  • Laparoscopy
  • Obstruction
  • Small bowel

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Laparoscopic vs. open surgery for acute adhesive small-bowel obstruction : Patients' outcome and cost-effectiveness. / Khaikin, M.; Schneidereit, N.; Cera, S.; Sands, D.; Efron, Jonathan; Weiss, E. G.; Nogueras, J. J.; Vernava, A. M.; Wexner, S. D.

In: Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques, Vol. 21, No. 5, 05.2007, p. 742-746.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Khaikin, M. ; Schneidereit, N. ; Cera, S. ; Sands, D. ; Efron, Jonathan ; Weiss, E. G. ; Nogueras, J. J. ; Vernava, A. M. ; Wexner, S. D. / Laparoscopic vs. open surgery for acute adhesive small-bowel obstruction : Patients' outcome and cost-effectiveness. In: Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques. 2007 ; Vol. 21, No. 5. pp. 742-746.
@article{870109a21eb040c79f56b449d48b2adb,
title = "Laparoscopic vs. open surgery for acute adhesive small-bowel obstruction: Patients' outcome and cost-effectiveness",
abstract = "Background: Numerous studies have demonstrated the feasibility of laparoscopy in the management of acute adhesive small-bowel obstruction (AASBO). However, comparative data with laparotomy are lacking. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopy and laparotomy for the treatment of AASBO in terms of patient outcome and cost-effectiveness. Methods: A retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent surgery for AASBO from 1999 to 2005 was conducted. Data recorded included operative and postoperative course, among others. Operative and total hospital charges were estimated from the Patient Accounting System. Results: Thirty-one patients who underwent laparoscopy were matched to a similar group of patients who underwent laparotomy. In the laparoscopy group, four patients (13{\%}) had a laparoscopy-assisted procedure and ten patients (32{\%}) were converted. The laparoscopy group was subdivided into laparoscopy, laparoscopy-assisted, converted, and assisted-converted subgroups. In the majority of the patients, AASBO was secondary to a single band. Overall morbidity was significantly higher in the laparotomy group (p = 0.007). Morbidity rates were statistically significant between the laparoscopy and assisted-converted subgroups (p = 0.0001) but not between the laparotomy group and assisted-converted subgroup (p = 0.19). Median hospital stay and median time to first bowel movement were significantly shorter in the laparoscopy group. Charge data were available for only the last three years of the study. Operative charges and total hospital charges were similar between the laparoscopy and the laparotomy groups (p = 0.14 and p = 0.10, respectively). There was a significant difference in total hospital charges between the laparoscopy subgroup and laparotomy group (p = 0.03). Conclusions: Laparoscopy for AASBO is associated with reduced hospital stay, early recovery, and decreased morbidity. Laparoscopy-assisted and converted surgeries do not differ significantly from laparotomy in regard to patient outcome. Operative and total hospital charges are similar for both laparoscopy and laparotomy.",
keywords = "Adhesions, Cost-effectiveness, Laparoscopy, Obstruction, Small bowel",
author = "M. Khaikin and N. Schneidereit and S. Cera and D. Sands and Jonathan Efron and Weiss, {E. G.} and Nogueras, {J. J.} and Vernava, {A. M.} and Wexner, {S. D.}",
year = "2007",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1007/s00464-007-9212-1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "742--746",
journal = "Surgical Endoscopy",
issn = "0930-2794",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Laparoscopic vs. open surgery for acute adhesive small-bowel obstruction

T2 - Patients' outcome and cost-effectiveness

AU - Khaikin, M.

AU - Schneidereit, N.

AU - Cera, S.

AU - Sands, D.

AU - Efron, Jonathan

AU - Weiss, E. G.

AU - Nogueras, J. J.

AU - Vernava, A. M.

AU - Wexner, S. D.

PY - 2007/5

Y1 - 2007/5

N2 - Background: Numerous studies have demonstrated the feasibility of laparoscopy in the management of acute adhesive small-bowel obstruction (AASBO). However, comparative data with laparotomy are lacking. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopy and laparotomy for the treatment of AASBO in terms of patient outcome and cost-effectiveness. Methods: A retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent surgery for AASBO from 1999 to 2005 was conducted. Data recorded included operative and postoperative course, among others. Operative and total hospital charges were estimated from the Patient Accounting System. Results: Thirty-one patients who underwent laparoscopy were matched to a similar group of patients who underwent laparotomy. In the laparoscopy group, four patients (13%) had a laparoscopy-assisted procedure and ten patients (32%) were converted. The laparoscopy group was subdivided into laparoscopy, laparoscopy-assisted, converted, and assisted-converted subgroups. In the majority of the patients, AASBO was secondary to a single band. Overall morbidity was significantly higher in the laparotomy group (p = 0.007). Morbidity rates were statistically significant between the laparoscopy and assisted-converted subgroups (p = 0.0001) but not between the laparotomy group and assisted-converted subgroup (p = 0.19). Median hospital stay and median time to first bowel movement were significantly shorter in the laparoscopy group. Charge data were available for only the last three years of the study. Operative charges and total hospital charges were similar between the laparoscopy and the laparotomy groups (p = 0.14 and p = 0.10, respectively). There was a significant difference in total hospital charges between the laparoscopy subgroup and laparotomy group (p = 0.03). Conclusions: Laparoscopy for AASBO is associated with reduced hospital stay, early recovery, and decreased morbidity. Laparoscopy-assisted and converted surgeries do not differ significantly from laparotomy in regard to patient outcome. Operative and total hospital charges are similar for both laparoscopy and laparotomy.

AB - Background: Numerous studies have demonstrated the feasibility of laparoscopy in the management of acute adhesive small-bowel obstruction (AASBO). However, comparative data with laparotomy are lacking. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopy and laparotomy for the treatment of AASBO in terms of patient outcome and cost-effectiveness. Methods: A retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent surgery for AASBO from 1999 to 2005 was conducted. Data recorded included operative and postoperative course, among others. Operative and total hospital charges were estimated from the Patient Accounting System. Results: Thirty-one patients who underwent laparoscopy were matched to a similar group of patients who underwent laparotomy. In the laparoscopy group, four patients (13%) had a laparoscopy-assisted procedure and ten patients (32%) were converted. The laparoscopy group was subdivided into laparoscopy, laparoscopy-assisted, converted, and assisted-converted subgroups. In the majority of the patients, AASBO was secondary to a single band. Overall morbidity was significantly higher in the laparotomy group (p = 0.007). Morbidity rates were statistically significant between the laparoscopy and assisted-converted subgroups (p = 0.0001) but not between the laparotomy group and assisted-converted subgroup (p = 0.19). Median hospital stay and median time to first bowel movement were significantly shorter in the laparoscopy group. Charge data were available for only the last three years of the study. Operative charges and total hospital charges were similar between the laparoscopy and the laparotomy groups (p = 0.14 and p = 0.10, respectively). There was a significant difference in total hospital charges between the laparoscopy subgroup and laparotomy group (p = 0.03). Conclusions: Laparoscopy for AASBO is associated with reduced hospital stay, early recovery, and decreased morbidity. Laparoscopy-assisted and converted surgeries do not differ significantly from laparotomy in regard to patient outcome. Operative and total hospital charges are similar for both laparoscopy and laparotomy.

KW - Adhesions

KW - Cost-effectiveness

KW - Laparoscopy

KW - Obstruction

KW - Small bowel

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34247639581&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34247639581&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00464-007-9212-1

DO - 10.1007/s00464-007-9212-1

M3 - Article

VL - 21

SP - 742

EP - 746

JO - Surgical Endoscopy

JF - Surgical Endoscopy

SN - 0930-2794

IS - 5

ER -