TY - JOUR
T1 - Contribution of bile duct drainage on resource use and clinical outcome of open or laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Japan
AU - Kuwabara, Kazuaki
AU - Matsuda, Shinya
AU - Fushimi, Kiyohide
AU - Ishikawa, Koichi B.
AU - Horiguchi, Hiromasa
AU - Hayashida, Kenshi
AU - Fujimori, Kenji
PY - 2010/2
Y1 - 2010/2
N2 - Aims Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is replacing conventional open cholecystectomy (OC) as a preferred surgical method for treating complicated biliary tract disorders. However, there have been few studies assessing the impact of staged bile duct drainage (BDD) on costs and clinical outcomes for either surgical approach. This study evaluated the impact of surgical technique and BDD on resource utilization and complication rates. Methods This study included 2778 cholecystectomy patients treated for benign biliary tract diseases in 80 academic and 81 community hospitals. For both OC and LC patients, the following variables were analysed: demographics, clinical data, length of stay (LOS), total charges (TC; US$), procedure-related complications and hospital type. Multivariate analyses were used to determine the impact of BDD on LOS, TC and complication rates. Results Of the 2778 cholecystectomy patients in the study, 2255 (81.2%) underwent LC. Inflammation was diagnosed in 55.6% of OC patients and 36.0% of LC patients. Complication was 9.4% in OC cases and 4.7% in LC cases. BDD was performed in 14.5% of OC cases and in 7.6% of LC cases. Diagnosis of inflammation, presence of co-morbidities and BDD each had a significant impact on LOS and TC. After risk adjustment, LC was associated with a reduction in LOS and TC, while BDD resulted in greater LOS and TC. LC and BDD were significantly associated with complications. Conclusions The study suggested that BDD utilized more resources and had higher rates of complications. LC remains an appropriate procedure for cholecystectomy patients. Further study will be needed to evaluate the effect of pre-operative or post-operative BDD on quality of care.
AB - Aims Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is replacing conventional open cholecystectomy (OC) as a preferred surgical method for treating complicated biliary tract disorders. However, there have been few studies assessing the impact of staged bile duct drainage (BDD) on costs and clinical outcomes for either surgical approach. This study evaluated the impact of surgical technique and BDD on resource utilization and complication rates. Methods This study included 2778 cholecystectomy patients treated for benign biliary tract diseases in 80 academic and 81 community hospitals. For both OC and LC patients, the following variables were analysed: demographics, clinical data, length of stay (LOS), total charges (TC; US$), procedure-related complications and hospital type. Multivariate analyses were used to determine the impact of BDD on LOS, TC and complication rates. Results Of the 2778 cholecystectomy patients in the study, 2255 (81.2%) underwent LC. Inflammation was diagnosed in 55.6% of OC patients and 36.0% of LC patients. Complication was 9.4% in OC cases and 4.7% in LC cases. BDD was performed in 14.5% of OC cases and in 7.6% of LC cases. Diagnosis of inflammation, presence of co-morbidities and BDD each had a significant impact on LOS and TC. After risk adjustment, LC was associated with a reduction in LOS and TC, while BDD resulted in greater LOS and TC. LC and BDD were significantly associated with complications. Conclusions The study suggested that BDD utilized more resources and had higher rates of complications. LC remains an appropriate procedure for cholecystectomy patients. Further study will be needed to evaluate the effect of pre-operative or post-operative BDD on quality of care.
KW - Bile duct drainage
KW - Laparoscopic cholecystectomy
KW - Open cholecystectomy
KW - Outcome
KW - Resource use
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77149138791&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77149138791&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2008.01109.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2008.01109.x
M3 - Article
C2 - 20367813
AN - SCOPUS:77149138791
SN - 1356-1294
VL - 16
SP - 31
EP - 38
JO - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
JF - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
IS - 1
ER -