Comparison of hospital costs for single-port and conventional laparoscopic colorectal resection: a case-matched study

Abstract

Background: Whether single-port laparoscopic (SPL) colorectal resection is cost-effective in comparison to conventional laparoscopy remains unclear. The aim of this study is to compare hospital costs for single-port versus conventional laparoscopic colorectal resections.

Methods: Patients with available cost data who underwent (SPL) colorectal resection between December 2007 and December 2010 were matched with conventional (multiport) laparoscopic (CL) counterparts for age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, body mass index, operation type and year of surgery. Patients who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery were not included in the study. Direct hospital costs for the two groups were compared.

Results: There were 90 patients in the SPL group and 90 patients in the CL group. Age (p = 0.79), gender (p = 0.88), body mass index (p = 0.82), American Society of Anesthesiologists score (p = 1) and diagnosis (p = 0.85) were similar in both groups. Operation type (p = 1), estimated blood loss (p = 0.17) and length of hospital stay (p = 0.06) were comparable between the groups. Operation time was significantly shorter in the SPL group (p < 0.001), thus anesthesia cost was significantly lower in this group (p = 0.003). Total costs (p = 0.5), operating room (p = 0.65), nursing (p = 0.13), pharmacy (p = 0.6), radiology (p = 0.27), professional (p = 0.38) and pathology/laboratory (p = 0.46) costs were similar between the two groups.

Conclusions: Single-port laparoscopic colorectal resection can be performed with comparable hospital costs to conventional multiport laparoscopy.