Cargando…

SILS: Is It Cost- and Time-Effective Compared to Standard Pediatric Laparoscopic Surgery?

The aim of the study was to review our experience with single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and to compare costs and operative time to standard laparoscopic surgery (SLS). A prospectively collected database of operative times and costs was analysed for the years 2008–2011. SILS cases were com...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Islam, Saidul, Adams, Stephen D., Mahomed, Anies A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3413955/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22900165
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/807609
_version_ 1782240123230879744
author Islam, Saidul
Adams, Stephen D.
Mahomed, Anies A.
author_facet Islam, Saidul
Adams, Stephen D.
Mahomed, Anies A.
author_sort Islam, Saidul
collection PubMed
description The aim of the study was to review our experience with single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and to compare costs and operative time to standard laparoscopic surgery (SLS). A prospectively collected database of operative times and costs was analysed for the years 2008–2011. SILS cases were compared to standard laparoscopy on a procedure-matched basis. Patient demographics, on-table time and consumable costs were collated. Descriptive statistics and Mann-Whitney U-test were utilized with SPSS for windows. Analysis of the data demonstrate that neither consumable costs nor operative time were significantly different in each group. Comparing operative costs, SILS appendicectomy, nephrectomy/heminephrectomy, and ovarian cystectomy/oophorectomy showed cost benefit over SLS (£397 versus £467; £942 versus £1127; £394 versus £495). A trend toward higher cost for SILS Palomo procedure is noted (£734 versus £400). Operative time for SILS appendicectomy, nephrectomy/heminephrectomy, and Palomo was lower compared to SLS (60 versus 103 minutes[mins.]; 130 versus 60 mins.; 60 versus 80 mins.). In conclusion, SILS appears to be cost-effective for the common pediatric surgical operations. There is no significant difference in operating time in this series, but small sample size is a limiting factor. Studies with larger numbers will be necessary to validate these initial observations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3413955
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34139552012-08-16 SILS: Is It Cost- and Time-Effective Compared to Standard Pediatric Laparoscopic Surgery? Islam, Saidul Adams, Stephen D. Mahomed, Anies A. Minim Invasive Surg Research Article The aim of the study was to review our experience with single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and to compare costs and operative time to standard laparoscopic surgery (SLS). A prospectively collected database of operative times and costs was analysed for the years 2008–2011. SILS cases were compared to standard laparoscopy on a procedure-matched basis. Patient demographics, on-table time and consumable costs were collated. Descriptive statistics and Mann-Whitney U-test were utilized with SPSS for windows. Analysis of the data demonstrate that neither consumable costs nor operative time were significantly different in each group. Comparing operative costs, SILS appendicectomy, nephrectomy/heminephrectomy, and ovarian cystectomy/oophorectomy showed cost benefit over SLS (£397 versus £467; £942 versus £1127; £394 versus £495). A trend toward higher cost for SILS Palomo procedure is noted (£734 versus £400). Operative time for SILS appendicectomy, nephrectomy/heminephrectomy, and Palomo was lower compared to SLS (60 versus 103 minutes[mins.]; 130 versus 60 mins.; 60 versus 80 mins.). In conclusion, SILS appears to be cost-effective for the common pediatric surgical operations. There is no significant difference in operating time in this series, but small sample size is a limiting factor. Studies with larger numbers will be necessary to validate these initial observations. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2012 2012-07-30 /pmc/articles/PMC3413955/ /pubmed/22900165 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/807609 Text en Copyright © 2012 Saidul Islam et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Islam, Saidul
Adams, Stephen D.
Mahomed, Anies A.
SILS: Is It Cost- and Time-Effective Compared to Standard Pediatric Laparoscopic Surgery?
title SILS: Is It Cost- and Time-Effective Compared to Standard Pediatric Laparoscopic Surgery?
title_full SILS: Is It Cost- and Time-Effective Compared to Standard Pediatric Laparoscopic Surgery?
title_fullStr SILS: Is It Cost- and Time-Effective Compared to Standard Pediatric Laparoscopic Surgery?
title_full_unstemmed SILS: Is It Cost- and Time-Effective Compared to Standard Pediatric Laparoscopic Surgery?
title_short SILS: Is It Cost- and Time-Effective Compared to Standard Pediatric Laparoscopic Surgery?
title_sort sils: is it cost- and time-effective compared to standard pediatric laparoscopic surgery?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3413955/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22900165
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/807609
work_keys_str_mv AT islamsaidul silsisitcostandtimeeffectivecomparedtostandardpediatriclaparoscopicsurgery
AT adamsstephend silsisitcostandtimeeffectivecomparedtostandardpediatriclaparoscopicsurgery
AT mahomedaniesa silsisitcostandtimeeffectivecomparedtostandardpediatriclaparoscopicsurgery