Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery

, Volume 17, Issue 1, pp 159–167 | Cite as

Financial Implications of Ventral Hernia Repair: A Hospital Cost Analysis

  • Drew Reynolds
  • Daniel L. Davenport
  • Ryan L. Korosec
  • J. Scott Roth
2012 SSAT Plenary Presentation

Abstract

Introduction

Complicated ventral hernias are often referred to tertiary care centers. Hospital costs associated with these repairs include direct costs (mesh materials, supplies, and nonsurgeon labor costs) and indirect costs (facility fees, equipment depreciation, and unallocated labor). Operative supplies represent a significant component of direct costs, especially in an era of proprietary synthetic meshes and biologic grafts. We aim to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of complex abdominal wall hernia repair at a tertiary care referral facility.

Methods

Cost data on all consecutive open ventral hernia repairs (CPT codes 49560, 49561, 49565, and 49566) performed between 1 July 2008 and 31 May 2011 were analyzed. Cases were analyzed based upon hospital status (inpatient vs. outpatient) and whether the hernia repair was a primary or secondary procedure. We examined median net revenue, direct costs, contribution margin, indirect costs, and net profit/loss. Among primary hernia repairs, cost data were further analyzed based upon mesh utilization (no mesh, synthetic, or biologic).

Results

Four-hundred and fifteen patients underwent ventral hernia repair (353 inpatients and 62 outpatients); 173 inpatients underwent ventral hernia repair as the primary procedure; 180 inpatients underwent hernia repair as a secondary procedure. Median net revenue ($17,310 vs. 10,360, p < 0.001) and net losses (3,430 vs. 1,700, p < 0.025) were significantly greater for those who underwent hernia repair as a secondary procedure. Among inpatients undergoing ventral hernia repair as the primary procedure, 46 were repaired without mesh; 79 were repaired with synthetic mesh and 48 with biologic mesh. Median direct costs for cases performed without mesh were $5,432; median direct costs for those using synthetic and biologic mesh were $7,590 and 16,970, respectively (p < .01). Median net losses for repairs without mesh were $500. Median net profit of $60 was observed for synthetic mesh-based repairs. The median contribution margin for cases utilizing biologic mesh was −$4,560, and the median net financial loss was $8,370. Outpatient ventral hernia repairs, with and without synthetic mesh, resulted in median net losses of $1,560 and 230, respectively.

Conclusions

Ventral hernia repair is associated with overall financial losses. Inpatient synthetic mesh repairs are essentially budget neutral. Outpatient and inpatient repairs without mesh result in net financial losses. Inpatient biologic mesh repairs result in a negative contribution margin and striking net financial losses. Cost-effective strategies for managing ventral hernias in a tertiary care environment need to be developed in light of the financial implications of this patient population.

Keywords

Cost analysis Biologic mesh Ventral hernia repair 

References

  1. 1.
    Wechter ME, Pearlman MD, Hartmann KE. Reclosure of the disrupted laparotomy wound; a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 2005;106:376–383.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mudge M, Hughes LE. Incisional hernia: a 10-year prospective study of incidence and attitudes. Br J Surg 1985;72:70–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cengiz Y, Israelsson LA. Incisional hernias in midline incisions: an eight-year follow up. Hernia 1998;2:175–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burger JW, Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, Halm JA, Verdaasdonk EG, Jeekel J. Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg 2004;240:578–583.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Flum DR, Horvath K, Koepsell T. Have outcomes of incisional hernia repair improved with time? A population-based analysis. Ann Surg 2003;237:129–135.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Poulose, BK, Shelton J, Phillips S, Moore D, Nealon W, Penson D, Beck W, Holzman MD. Epidemiology and cost of ventral hernia repair: making the case for hernia research. Hernia 2012;16:179–183.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Davenport DL, Henderson WG, Khuri SF, Mentzer RM Jr. Preoperative risk factors and surgical complexity are more predictive of costs than postoperative complications: a case study using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) Database. Ann Surg 2005;242:463–468.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Albright EL, Davenport Dl, Roth JS. Preoperative functional health status impacts outcomes after ventral hernia repair. Am Surg.2012;78:230–234.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Earle D, Seymour N, Fellinger E, Perez A. Laparoscopic versus open incisional hernia repair: a single institution analysis of hospital resource utilization for 884 consecutive cases. Surg Endosc 2006;20:71–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, van den Tol MP, de Lange DC, Braaksma MM, Ijzermans JN, Boelhouwer RU, de Vries BC, Salu MK, Wereldsma JC, Bruijninckx CM, Jeekel J. A comparison of suture repair with mesh repair for incisional hernia. N Eng J Med 2000;343:392–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Finan KR, Kilgore ML, Hawn MT. Open suture versus mesh repair of primary incisional hernias: a cost-utility analysis. Hernia 2009;13:173–182.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Israelsson LA, Jönsson L, Wimo A. Cost analysis of incisional hernia repair by suture or mesh. Hernia 2003;7:114–117.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Harth C, Rose J, Delaney CP, Blatnik JA, Halaweish I, Rosen MJ. Open versus endoscopic component separation: a cost comparison. Surg Endosc 2011;25:2865–2870.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kelly ME, Behrman SW. The safety and efficacy of prosthetic hernia repair in clean-contaminated and contaminated wounds. Am Surg 2002;68:524–528.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rosen MJ. Biologic mesh for abdominal wall reconstruction: a critical appraisal. Am Surg 2010;76:1–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Drew Reynolds
    • 1
  • Daniel L. Davenport
    • 1
  • Ryan L. Korosec
    • 2
  • J. Scott Roth
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Division of General Surgery, Department of SurgeryUniversity of Kentucky College of MedicineLexingtonUSA
  2. 2.Division of Finance, Office of the Executive Vice President for Health AffairsUK HealthCareLexingtonUSA
  3. 3.Department of SurgeryUniversity of Kentucky Medical CenterLexingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations