Comparison of resource utilization and long-term quality-of-life outcomes between laparoscopic and conventional colorectal surgery

Background: The outcomes of laparosopic and conventional colorectal surgery, with special reference to costs of treatment and patients' quality of life, were compared. Methods: A partly retrospective cohort Study was designed to assess the use of resources, and a follow-up interview was undertaken to evaluate patients' quality of life after both to define laparoscopic (LAP) and conventional (CON) surgery. Results: The length of hospital stay was significantly lower in the LAP group (median, 11 days; interquartile range [IQR], 9-15) than in the CON group (median, 16 days; IQR, 13-23; p < 0.0001), which is reflected in lower costs of hospitalization calculated for the three most frequent surgical interventions. Statistically significant improvements were noted between the median scores in the domains of physical functioning (LAP 85 vs CON 68; p < 0.05) and vitality (LAP 85 vs CON 69; p < 0.05). Conclusion: Laparoscopy is a promising alternative for the treatment of patients with colorectal diseases, offering lower costs and a better quality of life in the long term.