Laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy outcomes in Medicare beneficiaries in member states of the Large State PRO Consortium

Chyle and Bile Leak Following Open Cholecystectomy: A Rare Complication

Gallstone disease is extremely common and frequently and safely treated by cholecystectomy. Chyle leak is a rare but significant side effect of many abdominal surgeries with rarely reported post-cholecystectomy. In this case, we report a 78-year-old lady with multiple comorbidities and symptomatic gallstones who underwent open cholecystectomy complicated by bile and chyle leak, which was successfully managed with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and stenting for bile leak and conservative management for the chyle leak, which included drainage, low-fat diet, and octreotide.

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

BACKGROUND

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.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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).

CONCLUSIONS

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.

Meta-analysis of laparoscopic vs open cholecystectomy in elderly patients

AIM: To investigate the comparative effect of laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy in elderly patients.

METHODS: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has induced a revolution in the treatment of gallbladder disease. Nevertheless, surgeons have been reluctant to implement the concepts of minimally invasive surgery in older patients. A systematic review of Medline was embarked on, up to June 2013. Studies which provided outcome data on patients aged 65 years or older, subjected to laparoscopic or open cholecystectomy were considered. Mortality, morbidity, cardiac and pulmonary complications were the outcome measures of treatment effect. The methodological quality of selected studies was appraised using valid assessment tools. Τhe random-effects model was applied to synthesize outcome data.

RESULTS: Out of a total of 337 records, thirteen articles (2 randomized and 11 observational studies) reporting on the outcome of 101559 patients (48195 in the laparoscopic and 53364 in the open treatment group, respectively) were identified. Odds ratios (OR) were constantly in favor of laparoscopic surgery, in terms of mortality (1.0% vs 4.4%, OR = 0.24, 95%CI: 0.17-0.35, P < 0.00001), morbidity (11.5% vs 21.3%, OR = 0.44, 95%CI: 0.33-0.59, P < 0.00001), cardiac (0.6% vs 1.2%, OR = 0.55, 95%CI: 0.38-0.80, P = 0.002) and respiratory complications (2.8% vs 5.0%, OR = 0.55, 95%CI: 0.51-0.60, P < 0.00001). Critical analysis of solid study data, demonstrated a trend towards improved outcomes for the laparoscopic concept, when adjusted for age and co-morbid diseases.

CONCLUSION: Further high-quality evidence is necessary to draw definite conclusions, although best-available evidence supports the selective use of laparoscopy in this patient population.

Efficacy of the laparoscopic approach for anterior lumbar spinal fusion

BACKGROUND

This study compares the immediate postoperative outcomes in patients who undergo laparoscopic and open anterior lumbar spinal fusion and describes the learning curve associated with the performance of this procedure.

METHODS

The charts of patients who underwent anterior lumbar spinal fusion between January 1995 and July 1999 were reviewed. Data pertaining to the operation and postoperative course were analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine patients underwent anterior lumbar spinal fusion. Fourteen patients were excluded; a full analysis was performed on the records of the remaining 75 patients. Fifty-five patients underwent an attempted laparoscopic procedure, and 20 patients underwent an open procedure. The conversion rate was 38% (21/55 patients) in the group who underwent the laparoscopic procedure. In the 34 patients whose laparoscopic procedure was completed, there was significantly less blood loss and shorter postoperative ileus, but the operative time was longer, when compared with patients who underwent the open procedure. The laparoscopic procedures performed in 1999 resulted in fewer conversions, less blood loss, and a shorter operating room time, when compared with the laparoscopic procedures in 1998.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic anterior lumbar spinal fusion improves immediate postoperative results when compared with open anterior lumbar spinal fusion.