Clinical Outcomes and Healthcare Costs Associated with Laparoscopic Appendectomy in a Middle-Income Country with Universal Health Coverage
Although many studies have compared outcomes of laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) and open appendectomy (OA), some clinical and economic outcomes continue to be controversial, particularly in low–medium-income countries. We aimed at determining clinical and economic outcomes associated with LA versus OA in adult patients in Colombia.
Retrospective, cohort study based on administrative healthcare records included all patients who underwent LA or OA in Colombia’s contributory regime between July 1, 2013, and September 30, 2015. Outcomes were 30-day mortality rates, ICU admissions rates, length of stay (LOS), and hospital costs provided until discharge. Propensity score matching techniques were used to balance the baseline characteristics of patients (age, sex, comorbidities based on the Charlson index, insurer, and geographic location) and to estimate the average treatment effect (ATE) of LA as compared to OA over outcomes.
A total of 65,625 subjects were included, 92.9% underwent OA and 7.1% LA. For the entire population, 30-day mortality was 0.74 per 100 appendectomies (95% CI 0.67–0.81), the mean and median LOS were 3.83 days and 1 day, respectively, and the ICU admissions rate during the first 30 days was 7.92% (95% CI 7.71–8.12). The ATE shows an absolute difference in the mortality rate after 30 days of −0.35 per 100 appendectomies (p = 0.023), in favor of LA. No effects on ICU admissions or LOS were identified. LA was found to increase costs by 514.13 USD on average, with total costs of 772.78 USD for OA and 1286.91 USD for LA (p < 0.001).
In Colombia’s contributory regime, LA is associated with lower 30-day mortality rate and higher hospital costs as compared to OA. No differences are found in ICU admissions or LOS.
The authors thank Office of Information and Communication Technology of Ministry of Health and Social Protection from Colombia (Dolly Ovalle and Luz Emilse Rincon), for providing anonymized data for this study.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 8.Ohtani H, Tamamori Y, Arimoto Y et al (2012) Meta-analysis of the results of randomized controlled trials that compared laparoscopic and open surgery for acute appendicitis. J Gastrointest Surg Off J Soc Surg Aliment Tract 16:1929–1939. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-012-1972-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Temple LK, Litwin DE, McLeod RS (1999) A meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in patients suspected of having acute appendicitis. Can J Surg J Can Chir 42:377–383Google Scholar
- 23.Hernán M, Robins JM Causal inferenceGoogle Scholar
- 41.Livingston EH, Woodward WA, Sarosi GA, Haley RW (2007) Disconnect between incidence of nonperforated and perforated appendicitis: implications for pathophysiology and management. Ann Surg 245:886–892. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000256391.05233.aa CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 42.Andersson RE (2013) Short and long-term mortality after appendectomy in Sweden 1987–2006. Influence of appendectomy diagnosis, sex, age, co-morbidity, surgical method, hospital volume, and time period. A national population-based cohort study. World J Surg 37:974–981. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-012-1856-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar