Quality of life in the first 6 weeks following laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery.

OBJECTIVES: Evidence of how health-related quality of life (HRQOL) changes following laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery in the first 6 weeks of postoperative recovery is needed to inform cost-effectiveness evaluations. METHODS: Pragmatic prospective cohort study design. Consecutive patients requiring elective colorectal surgery were allocated to either laparoscopic or open surgery by administrative staff in a district general hospital in England, 2006-2007. Patients completed two validated, generic measures of HRQOL at baseline (preoperatively) and on multiple occasions in the first 6 weeks postsurgery using diaries (EuroQol five-dimensional [EQ-5D] questionnaire: 16 times; short-form 36 health survey [SF-36]: 4 times; HRQOL was compared between groups at each time point, and overall using repeated-measures analysis. RESULTS: Of 201 consecutive patients recruited, 32 (15.1%) were unable to complete diaries. Of the remaining 169 patients, 120 (71%) returned completed diaries at 28 days and 105 (62.1%) at 42 days. There was no difference in preoperative HRQOL scores between surgical groups, but the postoperative EQ-5D questionnaire and SF-36 scores were significantly higher in the laparoscopic group (EQ-5D questionnaire P = 0.005, SF-36 P = 0.007). Subgroup analysis showed that patients with a stoma have worse HRQOL than those without. HRQOL did not differ between the laparoscopic and open stoma patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents unique prospective data demonstrating that laparoscopic surgery confers HRQOL benefits for patients in the early recovery period following colorectal surgery, compared with open surgery. Consideration of these data in the context of a cost-effectiveness analysis will be reported separately.

Systematic review of the costs of laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

PURPOSE: Recent studies have confirmed the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic colorectal surgery; however, its use has not become widespread. One reason for this is perceived economic implications. A systematic review was undertaken examining the costs of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for articles comparing laparoscopic colorectal surgery and open surgery. Primary outcome measures were operating room, direct hospital, and indirect costs. Secondary outcomes were conversion rates and length of hospital stay. The percentage difference in costs was used for comparisons between studies. RESULTS: Twenty-nine articles were identified in which cost data were presented (total number of patients 3,681); the economic data in most studies was limited. Operating room costs were greater for laparoscopic colorectal surgery than open surgery in all studies (median difference, 50 percent; interquartile range, 27-78 percent; P < 0.001). There was no overall difference in total hospital costs (median difference, 0 percent; interquartile range, -17.5 to 21 percent). Only two articles collected data on indirect costs, with both in favor of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Hospital stay was shorter for laparoscopic colorectal surgery in all studies (median difference, 2.8 days; interquartile range, 1.3-3.7; P < 0.001). Median conversion rate was 7.8 percent (mean, 14 percent; interquartile range, 6-21 percent). CONCLUSIONS: Operating room costs are greater for laparoscopic colorectal surgery than open surgery. Total hospital costs are similar. There may be societal benefits associated with lower indirect costs for laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Cost should not be a deterrent to performing laparoscopic colorectal surgery.