Laparoscopic versus open subtotal gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: cost‐effectiveness analysis
Background Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (LSG) for cancer is associated with good perioperative outcomes and superior quality of life compared with the open approach, albeit at higher cost. An economic evaluation was conducted to compare the two approaches. Methods A cost–effectiveness analysis...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Oxford University Press
2020-10-01
|
Series: | BJS Open |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50327 |
id |
doaj-93e4a99fea974817bafb8e7532db80a3 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-93e4a99fea974817bafb8e7532db80a32021-04-02T09:17:36ZengOxford University PressBJS Open2474-98422020-10-014583083910.1002/bjs5.50327Laparoscopic versus open subtotal gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: cost‐effectiveness analysisA. Gosselin‐Tardif0M. Abou‐Khalil1J. Mata2A. Guigui3J. Cools‐Lartigue4L. Ferri5L. Lee6C. Mueller7Division of General Surgery Montreal Quebec CanadaDivision of General Surgery Montreal Quebec CanadaDivision of General Surgery Montreal Quebec CanadaDivision of Finance Montreal Quebec CanadaDivision of Thoracic Surgery McGill University Health Centre Montreal Quebec CanadaDivision of Thoracic Surgery McGill University Health Centre Montreal Quebec CanadaDivision of General Surgery Montreal Quebec CanadaDivision of Thoracic Surgery McGill University Health Centre Montreal Quebec CanadaBackground Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (LSG) for cancer is associated with good perioperative outcomes and superior quality of life compared with the open approach, albeit at higher cost. An economic evaluation was conducted to compare the two approaches. Methods A cost–effectiveness analysis between LSG and open subtotal gastrectomy (OSG) for gastric cancer was performed using a decision‐tree cohort model with a healthcare system perspective and a 12‐month time horizon. Model inputs were informed by a meta‐analysis of relevant literature, with costs represented in 2016 Canadian dollars (CAD) and outcomes measured in quality‐adjusted life‐years (QALYs). A secondary analysis was conducted using inputs extracted solely from European and North American studies. Deterministic (DSA) and probabilistic (PSA) sensitivity analyses were performed. Results In the base‐case model, costs of LSG were $935 (€565) greater than those of OSG, with an incremental gain of 0·050 QALYs, resulting in an incremental cost–effectiveness ratio of $18 846 (€11 398) per additional QALY gained from LSG. In the DSA, results were most sensitive to changes in postoperative utility, operating theatre and equipment costs, as well as duration of surgery and hospital stay. PSA showed that the likelihood of LSG being cost‐effective at willingness‐to‐pay thresholds of $50 000 (€30 240) per QALY and $100 000 (€60 480) per QALY was 64 and 68 per cent respectively. Secondary analysis using European and North American clinical inputs resulted in LSG being dominant (cheaper and more effective) over OSG, largely due to reduced length of stay after LSG. Conclusion In this decision analysis model, LSG was cost‐effective compared with OSG for gastric cancer.https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50327 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
A. Gosselin‐Tardif M. Abou‐Khalil J. Mata A. Guigui J. Cools‐Lartigue L. Ferri L. Lee C. Mueller |
spellingShingle |
A. Gosselin‐Tardif M. Abou‐Khalil J. Mata A. Guigui J. Cools‐Lartigue L. Ferri L. Lee C. Mueller Laparoscopic versus open subtotal gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: cost‐effectiveness analysis BJS Open |
author_facet |
A. Gosselin‐Tardif M. Abou‐Khalil J. Mata A. Guigui J. Cools‐Lartigue L. Ferri L. Lee C. Mueller |
author_sort |
A. Gosselin‐Tardif |
title |
Laparoscopic versus open subtotal gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: cost‐effectiveness analysis |
title_short |
Laparoscopic versus open subtotal gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: cost‐effectiveness analysis |
title_full |
Laparoscopic versus open subtotal gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: cost‐effectiveness analysis |
title_fullStr |
Laparoscopic versus open subtotal gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: cost‐effectiveness analysis |
title_full_unstemmed |
Laparoscopic versus open subtotal gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: cost‐effectiveness analysis |
title_sort |
laparoscopic versus open subtotal gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: cost‐effectiveness analysis |
publisher |
Oxford University Press |
series |
BJS Open |
issn |
2474-9842 |
publishDate |
2020-10-01 |
description |
Background Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (LSG) for cancer is associated with good perioperative outcomes and superior quality of life compared with the open approach, albeit at higher cost. An economic evaluation was conducted to compare the two approaches. Methods A cost–effectiveness analysis between LSG and open subtotal gastrectomy (OSG) for gastric cancer was performed using a decision‐tree cohort model with a healthcare system perspective and a 12‐month time horizon. Model inputs were informed by a meta‐analysis of relevant literature, with costs represented in 2016 Canadian dollars (CAD) and outcomes measured in quality‐adjusted life‐years (QALYs). A secondary analysis was conducted using inputs extracted solely from European and North American studies. Deterministic (DSA) and probabilistic (PSA) sensitivity analyses were performed. Results In the base‐case model, costs of LSG were $935 (€565) greater than those of OSG, with an incremental gain of 0·050 QALYs, resulting in an incremental cost–effectiveness ratio of $18 846 (€11 398) per additional QALY gained from LSG. In the DSA, results were most sensitive to changes in postoperative utility, operating theatre and equipment costs, as well as duration of surgery and hospital stay. PSA showed that the likelihood of LSG being cost‐effective at willingness‐to‐pay thresholds of $50 000 (€30 240) per QALY and $100 000 (€60 480) per QALY was 64 and 68 per cent respectively. Secondary analysis using European and North American clinical inputs resulted in LSG being dominant (cheaper and more effective) over OSG, largely due to reduced length of stay after LSG. Conclusion In this decision analysis model, LSG was cost‐effective compared with OSG for gastric cancer. |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50327 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT agosselintardif laparoscopicversusopensubtotalgastrectomyforgastricadenocarcinomacosteffectivenessanalysis AT maboukhalil laparoscopicversusopensubtotalgastrectomyforgastricadenocarcinomacosteffectivenessanalysis AT jmata laparoscopicversusopensubtotalgastrectomyforgastricadenocarcinomacosteffectivenessanalysis AT aguigui laparoscopicversusopensubtotalgastrectomyforgastricadenocarcinomacosteffectivenessanalysis AT jcoolslartigue laparoscopicversusopensubtotalgastrectomyforgastricadenocarcinomacosteffectivenessanalysis AT lferri laparoscopicversusopensubtotalgastrectomyforgastricadenocarcinomacosteffectivenessanalysis AT llee laparoscopicversusopensubtotalgastrectomyforgastricadenocarcinomacosteffectivenessanalysis AT cmueller laparoscopicversusopensubtotalgastrectomyforgastricadenocarcinomacosteffectivenessanalysis |
_version_ |
1724169756668329984 |