Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 32, Issue 9, pp 3874–3880 | Cite as

Minimally invasive versus open surgery in the Medicare population: a comparison of post-operative and economic outcomes

  • Caleb J. Fan
  • Hung-Lun Chien
  • Matthew J. Weiss
  • Jin He
  • Christopher L. Wolfgang
  • John L. Cameron
  • Timothy M. Pawlik
  • Martin A. Makary



Despite strong evidence demonstrating the clinical and economic benefits of minimally invasive surgery (MIS), utilization of MIS in the Medicare population is highly variable and tends to be lower than in the general population. We sought to compare the post-operative and economic outcomes of MIS versus open surgery for seven common surgical procedures in the Medicare population.


Using the 2014 Medicare Provider Analysis and Review Inpatient Limited Data Set, patients undergoing bariatric, cholecystectomy, colectomy, hysterectomy, inguinal hernia, thoracic, and ventral hernia procedures were identified using DRG and ICD-9 codes. Adjusting for patient demographics and comorbidities, the odds of complication and all-cause 30-day re-admission were compared among patients undergoing MIS versus open surgery stratified by operation type. A generalized linear model was used to calculate the estimated difference in length of stay (LOS), Medicare claim cost, and Medicare reimbursement.


Among 233,984 patients, 102,729 patients underwent an open procedure versus 131,255 who underwent an MIS procedure. The incidence of complication after MIS was lower for 5 out of the 7 procedures examined (OR 0.36–0.69). Re-admission was lower for MIS for 6 out of 7 procedures (OR 0.43–0.87). MIS was associated with shorter LOS for 6 procedures (point estimate range 0.35–2.47 days shorter). Medicare claim costs for MIS were lower for 4 (range $3010.23–$4832.74 less per procedure) and Medicare reimbursements were lower for 3 (range $841.10–$939.69 less per procedure).


MIS benefited Medicare patients undergoing a range of surgical procedures. MIS was associated with fewer complications and re-admissions as well as shorter LOS and lower Medicare costs and reimbursements versus open surgery. MIS may represent a better quality and cost proposition in the Medicare population.


MIS Medicare Bariatric Cholecystectomy Colectomy Hernia 



The authors acknowledge Mr. and Mrs. John Rodda and The Rodda Family Partnership, LTD, for their generous support of this research study at Johns Hopkins.


The authors acknowledge the funding support provided by Mr. and Mrs. John Rodda and The Rodda Family Partnership, LTD.

Compliance with ethical standards


Mr. Hung-Lun Chien is an employee of Medtronic, Inc. Drs. Caleb J. Fan, Matthew J. Weiss, Jin He, Christopher L. Wolfgang, John L. Cameron, Timothy M. Pawlik, and Martin A. Makary have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.


  1. 1.
    Novitsky YW, Litwin DE, Callery MP (2004) The net immunologic advantage of laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 18:1411–1419CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    da Luz Moreira A, Kiran RP, Kirat HT, Remzi FH, Geisler DP, Church JM, Garofalo T, Fazio VW (2010) Laparoscopic versus open colectomy for patients with American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) classifications 3 and 4: the minimally invasive approach is associated with significantly quicker recovery and reduced costs. Surg Endosc 24:1280–1286CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cooper MA, Hutfless S, Segev DL, Ibrahim A, Lyu H, Makary MA (2014) Hospital level under-utilization of minimally invasive surgery in the United States: retrospective review. BMJ 349:g4198CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Keller DS, Parikh N, Senagore AJ (2017) Predicting opportunities to increase utilization of laparoscopy for colon cancer. Surg Endosc 31:1855–1862CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chesney T, Acuna SA (2015) Do elderly patients have the most to gain from laparoscopic surgery? Ann Med Surg 4:321–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Makary MA, Segev DL, Pronovost PJ, Syin D, Bandeen-Roche K, Patel P, Takenaga R, Devgan L, Holzmueller CG, Tian J, Fried LP (2010) Frailty as a predictor of surgical outcomes in older patients. J Am Coll Surg 210:901–908CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Antoniou SA, Antoniou GA, Koch OO, Pointner R, Granderath FA (2015) Laparoscopic colorectal surgery confers lower mortality in the elderly: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 66,483 patients. Surg Endosc 29:322–333CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dua A, Aziz A, Desai SS, McMaster J, Kuy S (2014) National trends in the adoption of laparoscopic cholecystectomy over 7 years in the United States and impact of laparoscopic approaches stratified by age. Minim Invasive Surg 2014:635461PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gruber K, Soliman AS, Schmid K, Rettig B, Ryan J, Watanabe-Galloway S (2015) Disparities in the utilization of laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer in rural Nebraska: a call for placement and training of rural general surgeons. J Rural Health 31:392–400CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kannan U, Reddy VS, Mukerji AN, Parithivel VS, Shah AK, Gilchrist BF, Farkas DT (2015) Laparoscopic vs open partial colectomy in elderly patients: insights from the American College of Surgeons: National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. World J Gastroenterol 21:12843–12850CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bogani G, Cromi A, Uccella S, Serati M, Casarin J, Pinelli C, Ghezzi F (2014) Perioperative and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic, open abdominal, and vaginal surgery for endometrial cancer in patients aged 80 years or older. Int J Gynecol Cancer 24:894–900CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Southgate E, Vousden N, Karthikesalingam A, Markar SR, Black S, Zaidi A (2012) Laparoscopic vs open appendectomy in older patients. Arch Surg 147:557–562CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Banka G, Woodard G, Hernandez-Boussard T, Morton JM (2012) Laparoscopic vs open gastric bypass surgery: differences in patient demographics, safety, and outcomes. Arch Surg 147:550–556CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ecker BL, Kuo LE, Simmons KD, Fischer JP, Morris JB, Kelz RR (2016) Laparoscopic versus open ventral hernia repair: longitudinal outcomes and cost analysis using statewide claims data. Surg Endosc 30:906–915CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Samkoff JS, Wu B (1995) Laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy outcomes in Medicare beneficiaries in member states of the Large State PRO Consortium. Am J Med Qual 10:183–189CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sheetz KH, Norton EC, Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB (2017) Provider experience and the comparative safety of laparoscopic and open colectomy. Health Serv Res 52:56–73CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wright JD, Neugut AI, Wilde ET, Buono DL, Tsai WY, Hershman DL (2012) Use and benefits of laparoscopic hysterectomy for stage I endometrial cancer among Medicare beneficiaries. J Oncol Pract 8:e89–e99CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McCormack K, Scott NW, Go PM, Ross S, Grant AM (2003) Laparoscopic techniques versus open techniques for inguinal hernia repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003:CD001785Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wu JJ, Way JA, Eslick GD, Cox MR (2017) Transabdominal pre-peritoneal versus open repair for primary unilateral inguinal hernia: a meta-analysis. World J Surg. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Atkinson TM, Giraud GD, Togioka BM, Jones DB, Cigarroa JE (2017) Cardiovascular and ventilatory consequences of laparoscopic surgery. Circulation 135:700–710CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Xiong H, Wang J, Jia Y, Ye C, Lu Y, Chen C, Shen J, Chen Y, Zhao W, Wang L, Zhou J (2017) Laparoscopic surgery versus open resection in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Surg. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Soliani G, De Troia A, Portinari M, Targa S, Carcoforo P, Vasquez G, Fisichella PM, Feo CV (2017) Laparoscopic versus open incisional hernia repair: a retrospective cohort study with costs analysis on 269 patients. Hernia 21:609–618CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fan CJ, Hirose K, Walsh CM, Quartuccio M, Desai NM, Singh VK, Kalyani RR, Warren DS, Sun Z, Hanna MN, Makary MA (2017) Laparoscopic total pancreatectomy with islet autotransplantation and intraoperative islet separation as a treatment for patients with chronic pancreatitis. JAMA Surg 152:550–556CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Caleb J. Fan
    • 1
  • Hung-Lun Chien
    • 2
  • Matthew J. Weiss
    • 3
  • Jin He
    • 3
  • Christopher L. Wolfgang
    • 3
  • John L. Cameron
    • 3
  • Timothy M. Pawlik
    • 4
  • Martin A. Makary
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck SurgeryIcahn School of Medicine at Mount SinaiNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Minimally Invasive Therapies GroupMedtronic Inc.MansfieldUSA
  3. 3.Department of SurgeryThe Johns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreUSA
  4. 4.Department of SurgeryThe Ohio State University Wexner Medical CenterColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations