Laparoscopic vs. open appendectomy: systematic review of medical efficacy and health economic analysis.

GMS health technology assessment Pub Date : 2007-01-29
Vitali Gorenoi, Charalabos-Markos Dintsios, Matthias P Schönermark, Anja Hagen
{"title":"Laparoscopic vs. open appendectomy: systematic review of medical efficacy and health economic analysis.","authors":"Vitali Gorenoi,&nbsp;Charalabos-Markos Dintsios,&nbsp;Matthias P Schönermark,&nbsp;Anja Hagen","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Scientific background: </strong>Appendicitis is an inflammation of the appendix of the blind intestine. Appendicitis remains the most frequent cause for an acute abdomen. Both interventions, the open surgical (through opening of the abdominal cavity) as well as the laparoscopic approach (via insertion of an optic system and instruments into the abdominal cavity through three small incisions), are used for the excision of the inflamed appendix (appendectomy).</p><p><strong>Research questions: </strong>The performed evaluation addresses questions on the medical effectiveness of the use of laparoscopic appendectomy in comparison with the classical open appendix excision as well as on its cost-effectiveness based on the German health system.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search was conducted in October 2005 in the most important medical electronic databases. The medical analysis was performed on the basis of the most up to date systematic review (basic review) of randomized controlled studies (RCT), newly published RCT and on our own quantitative information synthesis of all studies as well as of selected methodologically high-value RCT. In the health economic analysis, relevant publications were evaluated and cost differences of both interventions were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One systematic review and 56 primary studies were included in the medical evaluation, 24 of these studies were included in the conducted subanalysis on the basis of methodologically high-value studies. In total, a relation of three avoided wound infections per one additional intraabdominal abscess has to be expected by the use of laparoscopic appendectomy in com-parison with the open operation. Diagnostic laparoscopy reduces the rate of unclear diagnoses within the scope of planned appendectomy in fertile women. By routine, leaving the macroscopically bland appendix in situ, the rate of negative appendectomy is reduced significantly and profound. The results speak for a small advantage of the laparoscopic appendec-tomy with regard to pain intensity, the time until reintroduction of liquid and solid diet, time until first stool as well as for a slightly better cosmetic result and slightly better quality of life. In the contemporary practice in Germany, a longer operation time, a reduced length of hospital stay and a similar time to return to work have to be expected by the use of laparoscopic appendectomy in comparison with open appendectomy. In the current health care situation in Germany, the use of laparoscopic appendectomy is associated with additional operation costs of approximately 150 to 200 Euro compared with the open appendectomy. By approximately 200 Euro costs savings due to the shorter length of hospital stay, the total (direct and indirect) costs of in-patient care of both interventions seem to be similar. Due to similar indirect costs, the total costs of both interventions lie also in the same range and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of both technologies are driven to zero.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The use of the results of the performed medical analysis in the cost calculations supports the conclusions of the health-economic evaluation on the same evidence level as in the medical analysis.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Laparoscopic appendectomy shows both small advantages (diagnostics, wound infections, pain intensity, cosmetic result and quality of life) and disadvantages (intraabdominal abscesses) when compared with open appendectomy. From a health-economic view, laparoscopic and open appendectomies are generally similar with respect to the direct in-patient and indirect costs. Therefore, the decision between the two alternatives should be made by the physicians individually.</p>","PeriodicalId":89142,"journal":{"name":"GMS health technology assessment","volume":"2 ","pages":"Doc22"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/25/2b/HTA-02-22.PMC3011343.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GMS health technology assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Scientific background: Appendicitis is an inflammation of the appendix of the blind intestine. Appendicitis remains the most frequent cause for an acute abdomen. Both interventions, the open surgical (through opening of the abdominal cavity) as well as the laparoscopic approach (via insertion of an optic system and instruments into the abdominal cavity through three small incisions), are used for the excision of the inflamed appendix (appendectomy).

Research questions: The performed evaluation addresses questions on the medical effectiveness of the use of laparoscopic appendectomy in comparison with the classical open appendix excision as well as on its cost-effectiveness based on the German health system.

Methods: A literature search was conducted in October 2005 in the most important medical electronic databases. The medical analysis was performed on the basis of the most up to date systematic review (basic review) of randomized controlled studies (RCT), newly published RCT and on our own quantitative information synthesis of all studies as well as of selected methodologically high-value RCT. In the health economic analysis, relevant publications were evaluated and cost differences of both interventions were calculated.

Results: One systematic review and 56 primary studies were included in the medical evaluation, 24 of these studies were included in the conducted subanalysis on the basis of methodologically high-value studies. In total, a relation of three avoided wound infections per one additional intraabdominal abscess has to be expected by the use of laparoscopic appendectomy in com-parison with the open operation. Diagnostic laparoscopy reduces the rate of unclear diagnoses within the scope of planned appendectomy in fertile women. By routine, leaving the macroscopically bland appendix in situ, the rate of negative appendectomy is reduced significantly and profound. The results speak for a small advantage of the laparoscopic appendec-tomy with regard to pain intensity, the time until reintroduction of liquid and solid diet, time until first stool as well as for a slightly better cosmetic result and slightly better quality of life. In the contemporary practice in Germany, a longer operation time, a reduced length of hospital stay and a similar time to return to work have to be expected by the use of laparoscopic appendectomy in comparison with open appendectomy. In the current health care situation in Germany, the use of laparoscopic appendectomy is associated with additional operation costs of approximately 150 to 200 Euro compared with the open appendectomy. By approximately 200 Euro costs savings due to the shorter length of hospital stay, the total (direct and indirect) costs of in-patient care of both interventions seem to be similar. Due to similar indirect costs, the total costs of both interventions lie also in the same range and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of both technologies are driven to zero.

Discussion: The use of the results of the performed medical analysis in the cost calculations supports the conclusions of the health-economic evaluation on the same evidence level as in the medical analysis.

Conclusions: Laparoscopic appendectomy shows both small advantages (diagnostics, wound infections, pain intensity, cosmetic result and quality of life) and disadvantages (intraabdominal abscesses) when compared with open appendectomy. From a health-economic view, laparoscopic and open appendectomies are generally similar with respect to the direct in-patient and indirect costs. Therefore, the decision between the two alternatives should be made by the physicians individually.

腹腔镜阑尾切除术与开放式阑尾切除术:疗效的系统评价和健康经济分析。
科学背景:阑尾炎是盲肠阑尾的一种炎症。阑尾炎仍然是引起急腹症最常见的原因。两种干预措施,开放手术(通过打开腹腔)和腹腔镜方法(通过三个小切口将光学系统和仪器插入腹腔)都用于切除发炎的阑尾(阑尾切除术)。研究问题:所执行的评估解决了使用腹腔镜阑尾切除术与传统开放阑尾切除术的医疗有效性问题,以及基于德国卫生系统的成本效益问题。方法:于2005年10月在全国最重要的医学电子数据库中进行文献检索。医学分析是在随机对照研究(RCT)、新发表的RCT的最新系统评价(基本评价)和我们自己对所有研究的定量信息综合以及选择方法学上高价值的RCT的基础上进行的。在卫生经济学分析中,评估了相关出版物,并计算了两种干预措施的成本差异。结果:1项系统评价和56项初步研究被纳入医学评价,其中24项研究在方法学高价值研究的基础上被纳入进行的亚分析。总的来说,使用腹腔镜阑尾切除术与开放手术相比,每增加一个腹内脓肿就有三个避免伤口感染的关系。诊断性腹腔镜检查降低了在计划阑尾切除术范围内诊断不清的比率。通过常规手术,将宏观上无症状的阑尾保留原位,可以显著降低阑尾切除术的阴性率。结果表明腹腔镜阑尾切除术在疼痛强度、重新引入液体和固体饮食的时间、第一次大便的时间以及稍微更好的美容效果和稍微更好的生活质量方面有一点优势。在德国的当代实践中,与开放式阑尾切除术相比,使用腹腔镜阑尾切除术预计手术时间更长,住院时间缩短,恢复工作时间相似。在德国目前的医疗状况下,与开放式阑尾切除术相比,使用腹腔镜阑尾切除术的额外手术费用约为150至200欧元。由于住院时间缩短,节省了大约200欧元的费用,两种干预措施的住院护理总费用(直接和间接)似乎是相似的。由于间接成本相似,两种干预措施的总成本也处于相同的范围,两种技术的增量成本效益比被驱动为零。讨论:在费用计算中使用已进行的医学分析的结果,在与医学分析相同的证据水平上支持卫生-经济评价的结论。结论:与开放式阑尾切除术相比,腹腔镜阑尾切除术具有较小的优势(诊断、伤口感染、疼痛强度、美容效果和生活质量)和劣势(腹内脓肿)。从健康经济的角度来看,腹腔镜阑尾切除术和开放式阑尾切除术在直接住院费用和间接费用方面大致相似。因此,两种选择之间的决定应由医生个人作出。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信