ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To compare inpatient costs for laparoscopic and small-incision cholecystectomy. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis using results of a single blind prospective randomised trial. SETTING: Teaching hospital, UK. SUBJECTS: 200 patients having elective cholecystectomy. INTERVENTIONS: Standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy with conversion to open cholecystectomy if necessary. Small-incision cholecystectomy using high right transverse epigastric incision, enlarged if necessary for safe exposure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Providers inpatient costs. RESULTS: Small-incision cholecystectomy cost Pound Sterling 995 and was 29% less expensive than the laparoscopic procedure which cost Pound Sterling 1397. Costs of equipment and operations themselves accounted for most of the difference. Results also suggest that costs to patients and society from time lost away from work may be lower for mini-cholecystectomy. CONCLUSIONS: The national health service could be spending over Pound Sterling 10m a year by encouraging laparoscopic rather than small-incision operations for cholecystectomy. Commissioners of health care should question whether the benefits of laparoscopic surgery justify the additional costs.
Subject(s)
Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/economics , Cholecystectomy/economics , Cholecystectomy/methods , Hospital Costs , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , Humans , Male , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/economics , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/methods , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Retrospective Studies , Single-Blind Method , Treatment Outcome , United KingdomABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Both gastric acid and duodenal juice have been implicated in Barrett's oesophagus. The aim of this study was to look at duodenal reflux in the oesophagus together with motility characteristics in a group of patients with Barrett's oesophagus and compare them with a mild oesophagitis group and to assess the effect of cisapride on any abnormalities. DESIGN: A prospective study comparing the two groups of patients was carried out. METHODS: Twenty patients with histologically proven Barrett's oesophagus and 20 patients with Savary-Miller grade 2 oesophagitis were studied. Standard oesophageal manometric measurements were carried out and on a separate occasion duodenogastro-oesophageal reflux (DGOR) was measured over a 4-h period using a sodium ion selective electrode. Patients with more than 5% DGOR were given cisapride (10 mg four times daily) and the studies repeated after 7 days of treatment. RESULTS: Barrett's patients showed more DGOR, 12.2% of the study time compared to 5.1% in the mild oesophagitis group, P = 0.012, but manometric findings were not significantly different. Sixteen patients were treated with cisapride. DGOR was reduced in 8 out of 12 Barrett's patients and 2 out of 4 oesophagitis patients, and proximal amplitude and distal oesophageal pressures were significantly elevated (P = 0.05 and P = 0.03, respectively). CONCLUSION: Monitoring of sodium ions in the oesophagus shows that patients with Barrett's oesophagus have significantly more DGOR than patients with uncomplicated oesophagitis and cisapride may be effective in removal of this reflux.
