Advantages of laparoscopic resection for ileocolic Crohn's disease. Improved outcomes and reduced costs

T M Young-Fadok1, K HallLong, E J McConnell

  • 1Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. youngfadok.tonia@mayo.edu

Surgical Endoscopy
|May 17, 2001
PubMed

Insights

Laparoscopic ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease is feasible, offering faster recovery and significant cost savings. This minimally invasive approach demonstrates clear patient benefits and economic advantages over traditional open surgery.

Area of Science:

  • Colorectal surgery
  • Minimally invasive surgery
  • Gastroenterology

Background:

  • Laparoscopic colorectal procedures present technical challenges and debated benefits.
  • The laparoscopic approach is often perceived as more expensive.
  • A specific model was used to evaluate laparoscopic ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To demonstrate the feasibility of laparoscopic ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease.
  • To determine the conversion rate from laparoscopic to open surgery.
  • To document patient benefits and perform a cost analysis.

Main Methods:

  • A consecutive series of laparoscopic ileocolic resections for Crohn's disease (LAP) were identified.
  • Case-match methodology was used to select open laparotomy controls (OPEN).
  • Matched criteria included age, gender, diagnosis, resection type, and operation date.

Main Results:

  • The conversion rate for laparoscopic surgery was 5.9%.
  • Patients in the LAP group experienced faster resolution of ileus, earlier diet advancement, and shorter hospital stays.
  • Laparoscopic surgery resulted in significantly lower direct, indirect, and total costs compared to open surgery.

Conclusions:

  • Laparoscopic ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease is a feasible surgical option.
  • Significant postoperative benefits include improved ileus resolution, reduced narcotic use, and shorter hospital stays.
  • This approach offers substantial cost savings, exceeding $3300 per patient.
Abstract