Risk of readmission after laparoscopic vs. open colorectal surgery

Iyare O. Esemuede, Alodia Gabre-Kidan, Dennis L. Fowler, Ravi P. Kiran

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: Laparoscopic colorectal resection (LC) is associated with known recovery benefits and earlier discharge when compared to open colorectal resection (OC). Whether earlier discharge leads to a paradoxical increase in readmission has not been well characterized. The aim of this study is to compare the risk of readmission after the two procedures in a large, nationally representative sample. Methods: Patients who underwent colorectal resection in 2011 were identified from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. LC and OC patients were compared for patient factors, complications, and readmission rates. A multivariable analysis controlling for significant factors was performed to evaluate factors associated with readmission. Results: Of 30,428 patients who underwent colorectal resection, 40.2% underwent LC. Length of stay (LOS) after LC was shorter than after OC (5.7 vs. 9.7 days, p < 0.001). LC was associated with a significantly lower rate of surgical site infections (SSI), bleeding, reoperation, 30-day mortality, and complications. Risk of readmission was greater for patients undergoing proctectomy than colectomy (12.7 vs. 10.6 %, p < 0.001), but was lower after laparoscopic than open for both procedures after controlling for confounding factors. Obesity, DM, operating time ≥180 min, steroid use, and ASA class 3–5 were found to be associated with readmission. Conclusion: Despite its technical complexity, LC can be performed without concerns for increased complications or readmission. The shorter length of stay and the lower risk of readmissions underline the true benefits of the laparoscopic approach for colorectal resection.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1489-1494
Number of pages6
JournalInternational Journal of Colorectal Disease
Volume30
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 13 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Colorectal Surgery
Length of Stay
Surgical Wound Infection
Colectomy
Quality Improvement
Reoperation
Obesity
Steroids
Databases
Hemorrhage
Mortality

Keywords

  • Laparoscopy
  • NSQIP
  • Quality
  • Readmission

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Risk of readmission after laparoscopic vs. open colorectal surgery. / Esemuede, Iyare O.; Gabre-Kidan, Alodia; Fowler, Dennis L.; Kiran, Ravi P.

In: International Journal of Colorectal Disease, Vol. 30, No. 11, 13.08.2015, p. 1489-1494.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Esemuede, Iyare O. ; Gabre-Kidan, Alodia ; Fowler, Dennis L. ; Kiran, Ravi P. / Risk of readmission after laparoscopic vs. open colorectal surgery. In: International Journal of Colorectal Disease. 2015 ; Vol. 30, No. 11. pp. 1489-1494.
@article{4444d1c502884621aa1be7fca52864ad,
title = "Risk of readmission after laparoscopic vs. open colorectal surgery",
abstract = "Purpose: Laparoscopic colorectal resection (LC) is associated with known recovery benefits and earlier discharge when compared to open colorectal resection (OC). Whether earlier discharge leads to a paradoxical increase in readmission has not been well characterized. The aim of this study is to compare the risk of readmission after the two procedures in a large, nationally representative sample. Methods: Patients who underwent colorectal resection in 2011 were identified from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. LC and OC patients were compared for patient factors, complications, and readmission rates. A multivariable analysis controlling for significant factors was performed to evaluate factors associated with readmission. Results: Of 30,428 patients who underwent colorectal resection, 40.2{\%} underwent LC. Length of stay (LOS) after LC was shorter than after OC (5.7 vs. 9.7 days, p < 0.001). LC was associated with a significantly lower rate of surgical site infections (SSI), bleeding, reoperation, 30-day mortality, and complications. Risk of readmission was greater for patients undergoing proctectomy than colectomy (12.7 vs. 10.6 {\%}, p < 0.001), but was lower after laparoscopic than open for both procedures after controlling for confounding factors. Obesity, DM, operating time ≥180 min, steroid use, and ASA class 3–5 were found to be associated with readmission. Conclusion: Despite its technical complexity, LC can be performed without concerns for increased complications or readmission. The shorter length of stay and the lower risk of readmissions underline the true benefits of the laparoscopic approach for colorectal resection.",
keywords = "Laparoscopy, NSQIP, Quality, Readmission",
author = "Esemuede, {Iyare O.} and Alodia Gabre-Kidan and Fowler, {Dennis L.} and Kiran, {Ravi P.}",
year = "2015",
month = "8",
day = "13",
doi = "10.1007/s00384-015-2349-9",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "30",
pages = "1489--1494",
journal = "International Journal of Colorectal Disease",
issn = "0179-1958",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Risk of readmission after laparoscopic vs. open colorectal surgery

AU - Esemuede, Iyare O.

AU - Gabre-Kidan, Alodia

AU - Fowler, Dennis L.

AU - Kiran, Ravi P.

PY - 2015/8/13

Y1 - 2015/8/13

N2 - Purpose: Laparoscopic colorectal resection (LC) is associated with known recovery benefits and earlier discharge when compared to open colorectal resection (OC). Whether earlier discharge leads to a paradoxical increase in readmission has not been well characterized. The aim of this study is to compare the risk of readmission after the two procedures in a large, nationally representative sample. Methods: Patients who underwent colorectal resection in 2011 were identified from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. LC and OC patients were compared for patient factors, complications, and readmission rates. A multivariable analysis controlling for significant factors was performed to evaluate factors associated with readmission. Results: Of 30,428 patients who underwent colorectal resection, 40.2% underwent LC. Length of stay (LOS) after LC was shorter than after OC (5.7 vs. 9.7 days, p < 0.001). LC was associated with a significantly lower rate of surgical site infections (SSI), bleeding, reoperation, 30-day mortality, and complications. Risk of readmission was greater for patients undergoing proctectomy than colectomy (12.7 vs. 10.6 %, p < 0.001), but was lower after laparoscopic than open for both procedures after controlling for confounding factors. Obesity, DM, operating time ≥180 min, steroid use, and ASA class 3–5 were found to be associated with readmission. Conclusion: Despite its technical complexity, LC can be performed without concerns for increased complications or readmission. The shorter length of stay and the lower risk of readmissions underline the true benefits of the laparoscopic approach for colorectal resection.

AB - Purpose: Laparoscopic colorectal resection (LC) is associated with known recovery benefits and earlier discharge when compared to open colorectal resection (OC). Whether earlier discharge leads to a paradoxical increase in readmission has not been well characterized. The aim of this study is to compare the risk of readmission after the two procedures in a large, nationally representative sample. Methods: Patients who underwent colorectal resection in 2011 were identified from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. LC and OC patients were compared for patient factors, complications, and readmission rates. A multivariable analysis controlling for significant factors was performed to evaluate factors associated with readmission. Results: Of 30,428 patients who underwent colorectal resection, 40.2% underwent LC. Length of stay (LOS) after LC was shorter than after OC (5.7 vs. 9.7 days, p < 0.001). LC was associated with a significantly lower rate of surgical site infections (SSI), bleeding, reoperation, 30-day mortality, and complications. Risk of readmission was greater for patients undergoing proctectomy than colectomy (12.7 vs. 10.6 %, p < 0.001), but was lower after laparoscopic than open for both procedures after controlling for confounding factors. Obesity, DM, operating time ≥180 min, steroid use, and ASA class 3–5 were found to be associated with readmission. Conclusion: Despite its technical complexity, LC can be performed without concerns for increased complications or readmission. The shorter length of stay and the lower risk of readmissions underline the true benefits of the laparoscopic approach for colorectal resection.

KW - Laparoscopy

KW - NSQIP

KW - Quality

KW - Readmission

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84945486503&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84945486503&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00384-015-2349-9

DO - 10.1007/s00384-015-2349-9

M3 - Article

C2 - 26264049

AN - SCOPUS:84945486503

VL - 30

SP - 1489

EP - 1494

JO - International Journal of Colorectal Disease

JF - International Journal of Colorectal Disease

SN - 0179-1958

IS - 11

ER -