The First Decade of Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy in the United States: Costs and Outcomes Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample
- 554 Downloads
Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) remains an uncommon procedure, and the safety and efficacy remain uncertain beyond single institution case series. The aim of this study is to compare outcomes and costs between laparoscopic (LPD) and open PD (OPD) using a large population-based database.
The Nationwide Inpatient Sample database (a sample of approximately 20 % of all hospital discharges) was analyzed to identify patients who underwent PD from 2000 to 2010. Patient demographics, comorbidities, hospital characteristics, inflation-adjusted total charges, and complications were evaluated using univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Hospitals were categorized as high-volume hospitals (HVH) if more than 20 PD (open and laparoscopic) were performed annually, while those performing fewer than 20 PD were classified as low-volume hospitals.
Of the 15,574 PD identified, 681 cases were LPD (4.4 %). Compared to OPD, patients who underwent LPD were slightly older (65 vs. 67 years; p = 0.001) and were more commonly treated at HVH (56.6 vs. 66.1 %; p < 0.001). Higher rates of complications were observed in OPD than LPD (46 vs. 39.4 %; p = 0.001), though mortality rates were comparable (5 vs. 3.8 %, p = 0.27). Inflation-adjusted median hospital charges were similar between OPD and LPD ($87,577 vs. $81,833, p = 0.199). However, hospital stay was slightly longer in the OPD group compared to LPD group (12 vs. 11 days, p < 0.001). Stratifying outcomes by hospital volume, LPD at HVH resulted in shorter hospital stays (9 vs. 13 days, p < 0.001), which translated into significantly lower median hospital charges ($76,572 vs. $106,367, p < 0.001).
Contrary to fears regarding the potential for compromised outcomes early in the learning curve, LPD morbidity in its first decade is modestly reduced, while hospital costs are comparable to OPD. In high-volume pancreatic hospitals, LPD is associated with a reduction in length of stay and hospital costs.
KeywordsPancreaticoduodenectomy Costs analysis Laparoscopic Nationwide Inpatient Sample
Compliance with ethical standards
Drs. Tran, Dua, Worhunsky, Poultsides, Norton, and Visser have no relevant conflict of interests.
- 4.Schmidt CM, Turrini O, Parikh P, House MG, Zyromski NJ, Nakeeb A, Howard TJ, Pitt HA, Lillemoe KD (2010) Effect of hospital volume, surgeon experience, and surgeon volume on patient outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a single-institution experience. Arch Surg 145:634–640CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.Kooby DA (2006) Laparoscopic surgery for cancer: historical, theoretical, and technical considerations. Oncology (Williston Park) 20:917–927 (discussion 927-918, 931-912) Google Scholar
- 12.Meguid RA, Ahuja N, Chang DC (2008) What constitutes a “high-volume” hospital for pancreatic resection? J Am Coll Surg 206(622):e621–e629Google Scholar
- 15.Kooby DA, Hawkins WG, Schmidt CM, Weber SM, Bentrem DJ, Gillespie TW, Sellers JB, Merchant NB, Scoggins CR, Martin RC 3rd, Kim HJ, Ahmad S, Cho CS, Parikh AA, Chu CK, Hamilton NA, Doyle CJ, Pinchot S, Hayman A, McClaine R, Nakeeb A, Staley CA, McMasters KM, Lillemoe KD (2010) A multicenter analysis of distal pancreatectomy for adenocarcinoma: is laparoscopic resection appropriate? J Am Coll Surg 210:779–785 (786-777) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 22.Song KB, Kim SC, Hwang DW, Lee JH, Lee DJ, Lee JW, Park KM, Lee YJ (2015) Matched case–control analysis comparing laparoscopic and open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with periampullary tumors. Ann Surg 262(1):146–155. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001079
- 23.Dokmak S, Fteriche FS, Aussilhou B, Bensafta Y, Levy P, Ruszniewski P, Belghiti J, Sauvanet A (2015) Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy Should Not Be Routine for Resection of Periampullary Tumors. J Am Coll SurgGoogle Scholar