Open compared with laparoscopic approach to Burch colposuspension: a cost analysis.
OBJECTIVE
To compare postoperative course and hospital charges of an open versus laparoscopic approach to Burch colposuspension for the treatment of genuine stress urinary incontinence.


METHODS
A retrospective chart review was performed to identify all patients undergoing open or laparoscopic Burch colposuspension by the same surgeon over a 2-year period. Patients undergoing additional surgical procedures at the time of colposuspension were excluded from the study. Twenty-one patients underwent open Burch colposuspension and 17 patients underwent laparoscopic colposuspension. Demographic data including age, parity, height, and weight were collected for each group. Both groups also were compared with regard to operative time, operating room charges, estimated blood loss, intraoperative complications, change in postoperative hematocrit, time required to resume normal voiding, length of hospital stay, and total hospital charges.


RESULTS
The laparoscopic colposuspension group had significantly longer operative times (110 versus 66 minutes, P < .01) and increased operating room charges ($3479 versus $2138, P < .001). There was no statistical difference in estimated blood loss or change in postoperative hematocrit between the two groups. No major intraoperative complications occurred in either group. Mean length of hospital stay was 1.3 days for the laparoscopic group and 2.1 days for the open group (P < .005). However, total hospital charges for the laparoscopic group were significantly higher ($4960 versus $4079, P < .01).


CONCLUSIONS
Laparoscopic colposuspension has been described as a minimally invasive, cost-effective technique for the surgical correction of stress urinary incontinence. Although the laparoscopic approach was found to be associated with a reduction in length of hospital stay, it had significantly higher total hospital charges than the traditional open approach because of expenses associated with increased operative time and use of laparoscopic equipment.
Kohli
N
N
Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Good Samaritan Hospital, University of Cincinnati School of Medicine, Ohio, USA.
Jacobs
P A
PA
Sze
E H
EH
Roat
T W
TW
Karram
M M
MM
D000328:Adult; D003365:Costs and Cost Analysis; D006801:Humans; D010535:Laparoscopy / Q000191:economics*; D008875:Middle Aged; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D014550:Urinary Incontinence, Stress / Q000601:surgery*