Related Experiment Videos
Open compared with laparoscopic approach to Burch colposuspension: a cost analysis
1Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Good Samaritan Hospital, University of Cincinnati School of Medicine, Ohio, USA.
Obstetrics and Gynecology
|September 1, 1997
Summary
Laparoscopic Burch colposuspension reduces hospital stay but incurs higher total charges compared to the open approach due to longer operative times and equipment costs for genuine stress urinary incontinence.
Area of Science:
- Urology
- Minimally Invasive Surgery
- Surgical Outcomes
Background:
- Genuine stress urinary incontinence (SUI) affects many women.
- Burch colposuspension is a surgical option for SUI.
- Minimally invasive techniques are increasingly explored for SUI treatment.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the postoperative course and hospital charges of open versus laparoscopic Burch colposuspension for SUI.
- Evaluate operative time, blood loss, hospital stay, and overall costs.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective chart review of patients undergoing Burch colposuspension by a single surgeon.
- Exclusion of patients with additional procedures.
- Comparison of 21 open and 17 laparoscopic cases.
Main Results:
- Laparoscopic approach had longer operative times (110 vs. 66 min) and higher operating room charges.
- No significant difference in blood loss or hematocrit change.
- Shorter hospital stay for laparoscopic (1.3 days) vs. open (2.1 days).
- Total hospital charges were higher for laparoscopic ($4960) vs. open ($4079).
Conclusions:
- Laparoscopic Burch colposuspension offers a shorter hospital stay for SUI treatment.
- However, it is associated with significantly higher total hospital charges.
- Increased operative time and equipment costs contribute to higher expenses in the laparoscopic approach.