Financial Aspects of Bile Duct Injuries

Adverse outcomes and short-term cost implications of bile duct injury during cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Bile duct injury (BDI) is an uncommon but major complication of cholecystectomy that has a poorly defined magnitude of effect on hospital costs. This study sought to calculate the healthcare costs, length of stay, and discharge status associated with bile duct injury in patients undergoing cholecystectomy in the United States.

METHODS

The Premier Healthcare Database, which comprises hospital-billing records from over 700 hospitals in the United States, was queried for all patients undergoing cholecystectomy between January 2010 and March 2018. BDI was defined by ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM codes. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and operative information were extracted. Hospital costs, length of stay, and discharge status were compared between BDI and non-BDI patients. Propensity score matching was used to minimize confounding factors. Multivariable regression models were used to estimate the association between BDI and the outcomes variables.

RESULTS

A total of 1,168,288 cholecystectomies were identified. BDI occurred in 878 patients (0.08%). Laparoscopy was the most common approach (> 95%). The majority of BDI occurred during inpatient admissions (71.0%). BDI patients had higher index admission hospital costs ($18,771 vs. $12,345, p < 0.0001), increased rate of discharge to an institutional post-acute care facility (odds ratio 3.89, 95% CI 2.92-5.19, p < 0.0001), and increased risk of readmission within 30 days after discharge (odds ratio 1.86, 95% CI 1.52-2.28, p < 0.0001), compared to patients without BDI. Among inpatient cholecystectomies, BDI was associated with increased length of stay (8.6 days vs. 4.8 days, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

BDI is associated with significantly increased hospital costs, length of stay, 30-day readmission, and discharge to an institutional post-acute care facility.

Cut or Do Not Cut? Assessing Perceptions of Safety During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Using Surgical Videos

OBJECTIVE

Bile duct injury remains a serious complication of laparoscopic cholecystectomy despite established criteria for the critical view of safety (CVS). Using surgical videos, we compared surgeons' willingness to divide critical structures based on their assessment of the CVS dissection.

DESIGN

Participants reviewed 20 operative videos lasting 1 minute each, edited at various points of the CVS dissection. Participants stated whether the structures were safe to divide, and if not, what steps they would take to achieve an adequate dissection. Videos were independently scored using a validated scale and categorized as an "adequate" or "inadequate" dissection based on the score. Participants were blinded to CVS score and adequacy. Cohen's kappa statistic was used to evaluate inter-rater agreement and responses were compared by univariate analysis.

SETTING

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Tertiary care university hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

General surgery residents (n = 13) and faculty (n = 13) at the study institution.

RESULTS

There was minimal agreement on willingness to divide critical structures among all participants (κ = 0.25), among faculty (κ = 0.30), and among residents (κ = 0.21). Participants were more willing to divide critical structures when videos showed an adequate CVS dissection (CVS score ≥ 4) than an inadequate dissection (CVS score ≤ 3) (60.4% vs. 16.3%, p = 0.043). For inadequate dissections, participants most commonly recommended further dissection of the hepatocystic triangle (30.8%). There was no significant difference in the rate of unsafe practices (choosing to divide critical structures for videos with an "inadequate" dissection) between faculty and residents (14.2% vs. 18.3%, p = 0.781).

CONCLUSIONS

There was minimal agreement on what constituted a safe CVS dissection and there was no difference in the rate of unsafe practices between trainees and faculty. Education may play a more important role than experience when building a culture of safety for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.