Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Cost-effectiveness analysis of laparoscopic versus open surgery in colon cancer

Cost-effectiveness analysis of laparoscopic versus open surgery in colon cancer Background Few economic evaluations have assessed laparoscopy for colon cancer. This study aimed to compare the cost- effectiveness of laparoscopic and open surgery for the treatment of colon cancer. Method A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed comparing two groups of patients treated according to standard clini- cal practice (REDISSEC-CARESS/CCR cohort) by laparoscopic or open surgery. Data were collected from health records on clinical characteristics and resource use over 2 years after surgery. To calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were obtained for each patient. Clinical heterogeneity was addressed using propensity score and joint multivariable analysis (seemingly unrelated regression) that included interactions between TNM stage, age, and surgical procedure to perform subgroup analysis. Results The sample was composed of 1591 patients, 963 who underwent laparoscopy and 628 open surgery. Using propensity score and regression analysis, we found that laparoscopy was associated with more QALYs and less resource use than open surgery (0.0163 QALYs, 95% CI 0.0114–0.0212; and − €3461, 95% CI − 3337 to − 3586). Costs were lower for laparoscopy in all subgroups. In the subgroups younger than 80 years old, utility was higher in patients who underwent laparoscopy. Nevertheless, open surgery had better outcomes in older http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Surgical Endoscopy Springer Journals

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/cost-effectiveness-analysis-of-laparoscopic-versus-open-surgery-in-L2ICuja54Z

References (46)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 by Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature
Subject
Medicine & Public Health; Surgery; Gynecology; Gastroenterology; Hepatology; Proctology; Abdominal Surgery
ISSN
0930-2794
eISSN
1432-2218
DOI
10.1007/s00464-018-6250-9
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Background Few economic evaluations have assessed laparoscopy for colon cancer. This study aimed to compare the cost- effectiveness of laparoscopic and open surgery for the treatment of colon cancer. Method A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed comparing two groups of patients treated according to standard clini- cal practice (REDISSEC-CARESS/CCR cohort) by laparoscopic or open surgery. Data were collected from health records on clinical characteristics and resource use over 2 years after surgery. To calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were obtained for each patient. Clinical heterogeneity was addressed using propensity score and joint multivariable analysis (seemingly unrelated regression) that included interactions between TNM stage, age, and surgical procedure to perform subgroup analysis. Results The sample was composed of 1591 patients, 963 who underwent laparoscopy and 628 open surgery. Using propensity score and regression analysis, we found that laparoscopy was associated with more QALYs and less resource use than open surgery (0.0163 QALYs, 95% CI 0.0114–0.0212; and − €3461, 95% CI − 3337 to − 3586). Costs were lower for laparoscopy in all subgroups. In the subgroups younger than 80 years old, utility was higher in patients who underwent laparoscopy. Nevertheless, open surgery had better outcomes in older

Journal

Surgical EndoscopySpringer Journals

Published: Jun 4, 2018

There are no references for this article.