Intracorporeal or extracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis after laparoscopic right colectomy: cost analysis of the Torino trial.

BACKGROUND: Intracorporeal (IIA) and extracorporeal anastomosis (EIA) are two well-established techniques for restoration of bowel continuity after laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC). Since no economic analysis comparing the two different anastomotic techniques has been performed yet, it is still unclear if IIA can reduce perioperative costs. The aim of the study was to compare costs of LRC with IIA or EIA for right-sided colon neoplasm. METHODS: This is a cost analysis of a single-institution double-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing the outcomes of LRC with IIA and LRC with EIA in patients with a right-sided colon neoplasm. All direct in-hospital costs related to patient's admission were recorded (intraoperative costs: operative room, surgical tools, blood units-postoperative costs: hospital stay, laboratory and microbiology analyses, diagnostic services, analgesic drugs and antibiotic therapy, blood units, reoperation-outpatient costs: post-discharge wound medications). This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, Number NCT03045107. RESULTS: A total of 140 patients were randomized and analyzed. Mean overall costs in the IIA group exceeded 349 € the mean overall costs of the EIA group (7926.87 ± 4617.23 € vs. 7577.45 ± 6131.17 €; P = 0.704). A mean extra charge of 608 € regarding total intraoperative costs was recorded in the IIA group (3058.84 ± 897.42 € vs. 2450.15 ± 558.90 €; P < 0.001). The cost of surgical instruments resulted in 542 € additional charge per patient in the IIA group compared to EIA group (1782.74 ± 541.26 € vs. 1240.55 ± 384.09 €; P < 0.001). The mean cost of operative room occupancy was comparable in IIA and EIA group: 1276.09 ± 514.94 € vs. 1209.60 ± 422.80 € (P = 0.405). No significant differences were observed in postoperative costs and in outpatient costs. CONCLUSION: This economic analysis showed that IIA and EIA after LRC had similar overall costs, even though there were intraoperative extra costs of IIA.

Minimally invasive adrenalectomy for large pheochromocytoma: not recommendable yet? Results from a single institution case series.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive adrenalectomy represents the treatment of choice of pheochromocytoma (PCC). For large or invasive PCCs, an open approach is currently recommended, in order to ensure complete tumor resection, prevent tumor rupture, avoid local recurrence, and limit perioperative hemodynamic instability. The aim of this study is to analyze perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic adrenalectomies (LAs) for large adrenal PCCs. METHODS: All consecutive LAs for PCC performed at a single institution between 1998 and 2020 were included. Two groups were defined: lesions larger (group 1) and smaller (group 2) than 5 cm. Short-term outcomes were compared in order to find any significant difference between the two groups. OUTCOMES: One hundred fourteen patients underwent LA during the study period: 46 for lesions larger and 68 for lesions smaller than 5 cm. No significant differences were found in patients' characteristics, median operative time, conversion rate, intraoperative hemodynamic and metabolic parameters, postoperative intensive care unit (ICU) admission rate, complications rate, and length of hospital stay. Long-term oncologic outcomes were similar, with a recurrence rate of 5.1% in group 1 vs 3.6% in group 2 (p = 1). CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive adrenalectomy seems to be safe and effective even in large PCC. The recommendation to prefer an open approach for large PCCs should probably be reconsidered.