Primary pyeloplasty for uretero-pelvic obstruction in the USA adult population with or without double-J indwelling ureteral stents. Insurance claims data on contemporary time to removal trends, perioperative complications, health care costs, and re-intervention rates.


Journal

Minerva urology and nephrology
ISSN: 2724-6442
Titre abrégé: Minerva Urol Nephrol
Pays: Italy
ID NLM: 101777299

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Oct 2024
Historique:
medline: 25 9 2024
pubmed: 25 9 2024
entrez: 25 9 2024
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Using a large population-based dataset, we primarily sought to compare postoperative complications, health-care expenditures, and re-intervention rates between patients diagnosed with ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) undergoing stented vs. non-stented pyeloplasty. The secondary objective was to investigate factors that influence the timing of DJ stent removal. Patients ≥18 years old with UPJO treated with primary open or minimally-invasive pyeloplasty were identified using the Merative™ Marketscan Out of 4872 patients who underwent primary pyeloplasty, 4154 (85.3%) had DJ placement. Postoperative complications were rare (N.=218, 4.47%) and not associated with ureteral stenting (odds ratio [OR]: 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55-1.12). The median cost for in-hospital charges was $21,775, with DJ stent placement independently increasing the median aggregate amount (OR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.09-1.53). Overall, re-interventions were performed in 21.18% of patients, with DJ stenting found to be protective (OR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.66-0.96). Higher Charlson Comorbidity Index, longer hospital stay, and open surgical approach were independent predictors for prolonged DJ stenting time to removal. Our study suggests that patients undergoing stent-less pyeloplasty did have a higher rate of secondary procedures, but not higher complications when compared to those undergoing stented procedures. Concurrently, the non-stented approach is associated with decreased health-care expenditures, despite the increased rates of secondary procedures.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Using a large population-based dataset, we primarily sought to compare postoperative complications, health-care expenditures, and re-intervention rates between patients diagnosed with ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) undergoing stented vs. non-stented pyeloplasty. The secondary objective was to investigate factors that influence the timing of DJ stent removal.
METHODS METHODS
Patients ≥18 years old with UPJO treated with primary open or minimally-invasive pyeloplasty were identified using the Merative™ Marketscan
RESULTS RESULTS
Out of 4872 patients who underwent primary pyeloplasty, 4154 (85.3%) had DJ placement. Postoperative complications were rare (N.=218, 4.47%) and not associated with ureteral stenting (odds ratio [OR]: 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55-1.12). The median cost for in-hospital charges was $21,775, with DJ stent placement independently increasing the median aggregate amount (OR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.09-1.53). Overall, re-interventions were performed in 21.18% of patients, with DJ stenting found to be protective (OR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.66-0.96). Higher Charlson Comorbidity Index, longer hospital stay, and open surgical approach were independent predictors for prolonged DJ stenting time to removal.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Our study suggests that patients undergoing stent-less pyeloplasty did have a higher rate of secondary procedures, but not higher complications when compared to those undergoing stented procedures. Concurrently, the non-stented approach is associated with decreased health-care expenditures, despite the increased rates of secondary procedures.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39320251
pii: S2724-6051.24.05834-8
doi: 10.23736/S2724-6051.24.05834-8
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

606-617

Auteurs

Francesco Del Giudice (F)

Department of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy - francesco.delgiudice@uniroma1.it.
Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA - francesco.delgiudice@uniroma1.it.
Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Guys and St Thomas' Hospital, London, UK - francesco.delgiudice@uniroma1.it.

Deok Hyun Han (D)

Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
Department of Urology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.

Anas Tresh (A)

Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.

Shufeng Li (S)

Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
Department of Dermatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.

Satvir Basran (S)

Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.

Vincenzo Asero (V)

Department of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.

Carlo Maria Scornajenghi (CM)

Department of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.

Dalila Carino (D)

Department of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.

Roberta Corvino (R)

Department of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.

Matteo Ferro (M)

Department of Urology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Felice Crocetto (F)

Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.

Benjamin Pradere (B)

Department of Urology, La Croix Du Sud Hospital, Quint Fonsegrives, France.

Andrea Gallioli (A)

Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Barcelona, Spain.
Department of Surgery, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain.

Wojciech Krajewski (W)

University Center of Excellence in Urology, Department of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.

Łukasz Nowak (Ł)

University Center of Excellence in Urology, Department of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.

Tomasz Szydełko (T)

University Center of Excellence in Urology, Department of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.

Bernardo Rocco (B)

Urologic Unit, ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo, La Statale University, Milan, Italy.

Maria Chiara Sighinolfi (MC)

Urologic Unit, ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo, La Statale University, Milan, Italy.

Ettore DE Berardinis (E)

Department of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.

Jonathan Kam (J)

Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Guys and St Thomas' Hospital, London, UK.

Rajesh Nair (R)

Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Guys and St Thomas' Hospital, London, UK.

Benjamin I Chung (BI)

Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH