Adding days spent in readmission to the initial postoperative length of stay limits the perceived benefit of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy when compared with open distal pancreatectomy
Abstract Background Published comparisons of laparoscopic (laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy [LDP]) to open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) identify improved lengths of stay (LOS) after LDP but do not include data on readmissions. Methods Demographic, operative, and postoperative outcomes data for pati...
Saved in:
Published in: | The American journal of surgery Vol. 201; no. 3; pp. 295 - 300 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
New York, NY
Elsevier Inc
01-03-2011
Elsevier Elsevier Limited |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Abstract Background Published comparisons of laparoscopic (laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy [LDP]) to open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) identify improved lengths of stay (LOS) after LDP but do not include data on readmissions. Methods Demographic, operative, and postoperative outcomes data for patients undergoing LDP or ODP between August 2007 and December 2009 were culled from our prospectively accruing pancreatic database. Electronic medical records were reviewed to determine cause, treatment, and LOS for readmissions. Results Patients undergoing LDP were statistically identical to those undergoing ODP in regard to age, presentation, demographic characteristics, comorbidities, operative times, tumor sizes, morbidity, mortality, and pancreatic fistula rates. The initial LOS was statistically shorter for those undergoing LDP (4.8 ± .1 days vs 8.7 ± .1 days, P < .001). The readmission rate for LDP was statistically higher than for ODP (25% vs 8%, P < .05). Overall LOS for LDP was 7.2 ± .3 days versus 9.3 ± .1 days for ODP ( P = .2). Conclusions Adding readmission LOS to initial LOS eliminates the perceived effect of LDP to accelerate recovery. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 0002-9610 1879-1883 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2010.09.014 |