Cost perspectives of laparoscopic and open appendectomy

  • D. E. MooreEmail author
  • T. Speroff
  • E. Grogan
  • B. Poulose
  • M. D. Holzman
Original article



Despite multiple studies comparing laparoscopic and open appendectomies, the clinically and economically superior procedure still is in question. A cost analysis was performed using both institutional and societal perspectives.


A decision analytic model was developed to evaluate laparoscopic and open appendectomies. The institutional perspective addressed direct health care costs, whereas the societal perspective addressed direct and indirect health care costs. Baseline values and ranges were taken from randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and Medicare databases.


From the institutional perspective, open appendectomy is the least expensive strategy, with an expected cost of $5,171, as compared with $6,118 for laparoscopic appendectomy. The laparoscopic approach is less expensive if open appendectomy wound infection rates exceed 23%. From the societal perspective, laparoscopic appendectomy is the least expensive strategy, with an expected cost of $10,400, as compared with $12,055 for open appendectomy.


The decision analysis demonstrated an economic advantage to the hospital of open appendectomy. In contrast, laparoscopic appendectomy represents a better economic choice for the patient.


Decision analysis Cost-effectiveness Appendicitis Appendectomy Laparoscopy 


  1. 1.
    Birkmeyer, JD, Liu, JY 2003Decision analysis models: opening the black boxSurgery13314CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chung, RS, Rowland, DY, Li, P, Diaz, J 1999A meta analysis of randomized controlled trials of laparoscopic versus conventional appendectomyAm J Surg177250225CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Golub, R, Siddiqui, F, Pohl, D 1998Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a metaanalysisJ Am Coll Surg186545553CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hart, R, Rajgopal, C, Plewes, A, Sweeney, J, Davies, W, Gray, D, Taylor, B 1996Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a prospective randomized trial of 81 patientsCan J Surg39457462PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hebebrand, D, Troidl, H, Spangenberger, W, Neugebauer, E, Schwalm, T, Gunther, MW 1994Laparoscopic or classical appendectomy? A prospective randomized studyChirurg65112120PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kazemier, G, Zeeuw, GR, Lange, JF, Hop, WC, Bonjer, HJ 1997Laparoscopic vs open appendectomy: a randomized clinical trialSurg Endosc11336340CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kum, CK, Ngoi, SS, Goh, PM, Tekant, Y, Isaac, JR 1993Randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic and open appendicectomyBr J Surg8015991600PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Laine, S, Rantala, A, Gullichsen, R, Ovaska, J 1997Laparoscopic appendectomy: is it worthwhile? A prospective, randomized study in young womenSurg Endosc119597CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Long, KH, Bannon, MP, Zietlow, SP, Helgeson, ER, Harmsen, WS, Smith, CD, Ilstrup, DM, Baerga-Varela, Y, Sarr, MG 2001A prospective randomized comparison of laparoscopic appendectomy with open appendectomy: clinical and economic analysesSurgery129390400CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    McBurney, C 1894The incision made in the abdominal wall in cases of appendicitis, with a description of a new method of OperatingAnn Surg2038Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Messick, CR, Mamdani, M, McNichol, IR, Danziger, LH, Rodvold, KA, Condon, RE, Walker, AP, Edmiston, CE,Jr 1998Pharmacoeconomic analysis of ampicillin-sulbactam versus cefoxitin in the treatment of intraabdominal infectionsPharmacotherapy18175183PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Minne, L, Varner, D, Burnell, A, Ratzer, E, Clark, J, Haun, W 1997Laparoscopic vs open appendectomy:prospective randomized study of outcomesArch Surg132708711PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ortega, AE, Hunter, JG, Peters, JH, Swanstrom, LL, Schirmer, BA 1995Prospective, randomized comparison of laparoscopic appendectomy with open appendectomy. Laparoscopic Appendectomy Study GroupAm J Surg169208212CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pedersen, AG, Petersen, OB, Wara, P, Ronning, H, Qvist, N, Laurberg, S 2001Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open appendicectomyBr J Surg88200205CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tate, JJ, Dawson, JW, Chung, SC, Lau, WY, Li, AK 1993Laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy: prospective randomised trialLancet342633637CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Williams, MD, Collins, JN, Wright, TF, Fenoglio, ME 1996Laparoscopic versus open appendectomySouth Med J89668674PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Litynski, GS 1998Kurt Semm and the fight against skepticism: endoscopic hemostasis, Laparascopic appendectomy, and Semm’s impact on the Laparascopic Revolution.JSLS2309313PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. E. Moore
    • 1
    Email author
  • T. Speroff
    • 2
  • E. Grogan
    • 1
  • B. Poulose
    • 1
  • M. D. Holzman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryVanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA
  2. 2.Department of Medicine and Center for Health Services Research, and Nashville Veterans Administration Medical CenterVanderbilt University Medical Center, Vanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations