Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2004 Sep;91(9):1188-91.
doi: 10.1002/bjs.4643.

Economic impact of laparoscopic versus open abdominal rectopexy

G Salkeld  1 , M Bagia, M Solomon
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Economic impact of laparoscopic versus open abdominal rectopexy

G Salkeld et al. Br J Surg. 2004 Sep.

Abstract

Background: The introduction of new laparoscopic techniques has important cost implications. The aim of this study was to compare the cost effectiveness of laparoscopic rectopexy with that of open abdominal rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse.

Methods: A cost effectiveness study was conducted alongside a randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open abdominal rectopexy.

Results: The efficacy trial demonstrated significant subjective and objective differences in favour of the laparoscopic technique. The mean operating time was 51 min longer for laparoscopic rectopexy than for the open procedure. Laparoscopic disposables incurred a mean cost of pound 291 per patient. The mean duration of hospital stay was significantly shorter for the laparoscopic group (P = 0.001). Laparoscopic rectopexy was associated with an overall mean cost saving of pound 357 (95 per cent confidence interval pound 164 to pound 592; P = 0.042) per patient.

Conclusion: Laparoscopic rectopexy is associated with superior clinical outcomes and is cheaper than the open approach.

PubMed Disclaimer