ZComparison of perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open abdominoperineal resection

Anton Simorov, Jason F. Reynoso, Oleg Dolghi, Jon S Thompson, Dmitry Oleynikov

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare the outcomes of laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (APR) and open APR. Methods: A multicenter, retrospective analysis was performed. The University HealthSystem Consortium database was accessed and searched for International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes between October 2008 and January 2010. Discharge data were collected on patients undergoing laparoscopic APR and open APR. Results: Six hundred sixty-seven patients underwent laparoscopic APR, and 2,443 underwent open APR. When lower risk patient groups with minor or moderate severity of illness were compared, laparoscopic APR showed lower morbidity, reduced length of stay, reduced cost, and reduced incidence of intensive care unit admission. Comparative analysis showed no significant difference in mortality rate or 30-day readmission. When higher risk patients were compared, there were significantly reduced costs and reduced incidence of intensive care unit cases in the laparoscopic group. Conclusions: Patients undergoing laparoscopic APR had overall superior perioperative outcomes compared with those undergoing open APR. Laparoscopic APR demonstrates excellent perioperative outcomes in appropriately selected patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)666-672
Number of pages7
JournalAmerican journal of surgery
Volume202
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2011

Fingerprint

Intensive Care Units
Costs and Cost Analysis
Incidence
International Classification of Diseases
Length of Stay
Databases
Morbidity
Mortality

Keywords

  • Abdominoperineal resection
  • Laparoscopic surgery
  • Open surgery
  • Outcomes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

ZComparison of perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open abdominoperineal resection. / Simorov, Anton; Reynoso, Jason F.; Dolghi, Oleg; Thompson, Jon S; Oleynikov, Dmitry.

In: American journal of surgery, Vol. 202, No. 6, 01.12.2011, p. 666-672.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ab27ce6f395148da8be08fd8ce0bbf81,
title = "ZComparison of perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open abdominoperineal resection",
abstract = "Background: The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare the outcomes of laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (APR) and open APR. Methods: A multicenter, retrospective analysis was performed. The University HealthSystem Consortium database was accessed and searched for International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes between October 2008 and January 2010. Discharge data were collected on patients undergoing laparoscopic APR and open APR. Results: Six hundred sixty-seven patients underwent laparoscopic APR, and 2,443 underwent open APR. When lower risk patient groups with minor or moderate severity of illness were compared, laparoscopic APR showed lower morbidity, reduced length of stay, reduced cost, and reduced incidence of intensive care unit admission. Comparative analysis showed no significant difference in mortality rate or 30-day readmission. When higher risk patients were compared, there were significantly reduced costs and reduced incidence of intensive care unit cases in the laparoscopic group. Conclusions: Patients undergoing laparoscopic APR had overall superior perioperative outcomes compared with those undergoing open APR. Laparoscopic APR demonstrates excellent perioperative outcomes in appropriately selected patients.",
keywords = "Abdominoperineal resection, Laparoscopic surgery, Open surgery, Outcomes",
author = "Anton Simorov and Reynoso, {Jason F.} and Oleg Dolghi and Thompson, {Jon S} and Dmitry Oleynikov",
year = "2011",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.amjsurg.2011.06.029",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "202",
pages = "666--672",
journal = "American Journal of Surgery",
issn = "0002-9610",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - ZComparison of perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open abdominoperineal resection

AU - Simorov, Anton

AU - Reynoso, Jason F.

AU - Dolghi, Oleg

AU - Thompson, Jon S

AU - Oleynikov, Dmitry

PY - 2011/12/1

Y1 - 2011/12/1

N2 - Background: The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare the outcomes of laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (APR) and open APR. Methods: A multicenter, retrospective analysis was performed. The University HealthSystem Consortium database was accessed and searched for International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes between October 2008 and January 2010. Discharge data were collected on patients undergoing laparoscopic APR and open APR. Results: Six hundred sixty-seven patients underwent laparoscopic APR, and 2,443 underwent open APR. When lower risk patient groups with minor or moderate severity of illness were compared, laparoscopic APR showed lower morbidity, reduced length of stay, reduced cost, and reduced incidence of intensive care unit admission. Comparative analysis showed no significant difference in mortality rate or 30-day readmission. When higher risk patients were compared, there were significantly reduced costs and reduced incidence of intensive care unit cases in the laparoscopic group. Conclusions: Patients undergoing laparoscopic APR had overall superior perioperative outcomes compared with those undergoing open APR. Laparoscopic APR demonstrates excellent perioperative outcomes in appropriately selected patients.

AB - Background: The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare the outcomes of laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (APR) and open APR. Methods: A multicenter, retrospective analysis was performed. The University HealthSystem Consortium database was accessed and searched for International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes between October 2008 and January 2010. Discharge data were collected on patients undergoing laparoscopic APR and open APR. Results: Six hundred sixty-seven patients underwent laparoscopic APR, and 2,443 underwent open APR. When lower risk patient groups with minor or moderate severity of illness were compared, laparoscopic APR showed lower morbidity, reduced length of stay, reduced cost, and reduced incidence of intensive care unit admission. Comparative analysis showed no significant difference in mortality rate or 30-day readmission. When higher risk patients were compared, there were significantly reduced costs and reduced incidence of intensive care unit cases in the laparoscopic group. Conclusions: Patients undergoing laparoscopic APR had overall superior perioperative outcomes compared with those undergoing open APR. Laparoscopic APR demonstrates excellent perioperative outcomes in appropriately selected patients.

KW - Abdominoperineal resection

KW - Laparoscopic surgery

KW - Open surgery

KW - Outcomes

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=82655173815&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=82655173815&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2011.06.029

DO - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2011.06.029

M3 - Article

VL - 202

SP - 666

EP - 672

JO - American Journal of Surgery

JF - American Journal of Surgery

SN - 0002-9610

IS - 6

ER -