Ultrasonic surgical and electrosurgical system (USES) with conventional ultrasonic scalpel (CUS) in gastrectomy: a retrospective cohort study

Table 3 Ultrasonic technique utilization-related cost of USES group versus CUS group

	CUS	USES	Adjusted difference: USES vs CUS
	Mean (SD)	Mean (SD)	Estimates (95% CI)	p-value
Intraoperative costs (¥)
Ultrasonic scalpel^a	2976.00	5004.00	–	–
Hemoclips^b	2083.42 (696.28)	1688.44 (524.98)	− 380.457 (− 710.127, − 50.787)	< 0.05
Postoperative costs (¥)
Postoperative hospitalization^c	9614.98 (2918.05)	8206.99 (2021.01)	− 924.59 (− 820.70, 1038.86)	0.05
Total costs^d (¥)	14,674.40 (3095.97)	14,899.44 (2044.20)	625.30 (− 695.93, 1946.53)	0.36

Adjusted difference: the coefficient of treatment indicator (USES vs. CUS, coded as 1 vs. 0) in a linear regression by controlling age, gender, height, weight, BMI, smoking status, medical conditions, and cancer stage
CUS conventional ultrasonic scalpel, USES ultrasonic surgical and electrosurgical system, SD standard deviation
^aThe unit price was ¥2976.00 for a conventional ultrasonic scalpel and ¥5004.00 for Harmonic ACE +7. All patients used one ultrasonic scalpel during surgery.
^bThe unit price of hemoclips was ¥89.10. The cost of hemoclips per patient was calculated by the number of hemoclips used × unit price of hemoclips.
^cThe daily essential cost of postoperative hospitalization was ¥1038.86 (Additional file 1: Table S1). The cost of postoperative hospitalization per patient was calculated by postoperative LOS × daily essential cost of postoperative hospitalization.
^dTotal cost related to ultrasonic technique utilization

ISSN: 1478-7547