Systematic review of economic evaluations of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer
- 29 October 2008
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Wiley in Colorectal Disease
- Vol. 10 (9), 859-868
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2008.01609.x
Abstract
Objective Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancers and the standard surgical treatment for this cancer is open resection (OS), but laparoscopic surgery (LS) may be an alternative treatment. In 2000, a Health Technology Assessment (HTA) review found little evidence on costs and cost-effectiveness in comparing the two methods. The evidence base has since expanded and this study systematically reviews the economic evaluations on the subject published since 2000.\ud Method Systematic review of studies reporting costs and outcomes of LS vs OS for colorectal cancer. National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) methods for abstract writing were followed. Studies were summarized and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) for common outcomes were calculated.\ud Results Five studies met the inclusion criteria. LS generally had higher healthcare costs. Most studies reported longer operational time and shorter length of stay and similar long-term outcomes with LS vs OS. Only one outcome, complications, was common across all studies but results lacked consistency (e.g. in two studies, OS was less costly but more effective; in another study, LS was less costly but more effective; and in the further two studies, LS could potentially be cost effective depending on the decision-makers' willingness to pay for the health gain).\ud Conclusion The evidence on cost-effectiveness is not consistent. LS was generally more costly than OS. However, the effectiveness data used in individual economic evaluation were imprecise and unreliable when compared with data from systematic reviews of effectiveness. Nevertheless, short-term benefits of LS (e.g. shorter recovery) may make LS appear less costly when productivity gains are considered.Department of Health, National Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment, Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health DirectoratesPeer reviewedAuthor versioKeywords
This publication has 19 references indexed in Scilit:
- Economic evaluation of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancerInternational Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 2007
- Short-term costs of conventional vs laparoscopic assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial)British Journal of Cancer, 2006
- Randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for colorectal cancer within an enhanced recovery programmeBritish Journal of Surgery, 2005
- Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trialThe Lancet, 2005
- Laparoscopic resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma: prospective randomised trialThe Lancet, 2004
- Randomized clinical trial of the costs of open and laparoscopic surgery for colonic cancerBritish Journal of Surgery, 2004
- Principles of Good Practice for Decision Analytic Modeling in Health-Care Evaluation: Report of the ISPOR Task Force on Good Research Practices—Modeling StudiesValue in Health, 2003
- Laparoscopy-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer: a randomised trialThe Lancet, 2002
- Prospective randomized trial comparing conventional laparoscopic colectomy with hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomySurgical Endoscopy, 2001
- Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery in the united states: An overviewSeminars in Laparoscopic Surgery, 2001