Economic evaluation of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer
- 1 October 2007
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
- Vol. 23 (4), 464-472
- https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266462307070559
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery compared with open surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer.Methods: A Markov model was developed to model cost-effectiveness over 25 years. Data on the clinical effectiveness of laparoscopic and open surgery for colorectal cancer were obtained from a systematic review of the literature. Data on costs came from a systematic review of economic evaluations and from published sources. The outcomes of the model were presented as the incremental cost per life-year gained and using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves to illustrate the likelihood that a treatment was cost-effective at various threshold values for society's willingness to pay for an additional life-year.Results: Laparoscopic surgery was on average £300 more costly and slightly less effective than open surgery and had a 30 percent chance of being cost-effective if society is willing to pay £30,000 for a life-year. One interpretation of the available data suggests equal survival and disease-free survival. Making this assumption, laparoscopic surgery had a greater chance of being considered cost-effective. Presenting the results as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) made no difference to the results, as utility data were poor. Evidence suggests short-term benefits after laparoscopic repair. This benefit would have to be at least 0.01 of a QALY for laparoscopic surgery to be considered cost-effective.Conclusions: Laparoscopic surgery is likely to be associated with short-term quality of life benefits, similar long-term outcomes, and an additional £300 per patient. A judgment is required as to whether the short-term benefits are worth this extra cost.Keywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- Laparoscopically Assisted vs Open Colectomy for Colon CancerArchives of Surgery, 2007
- Randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for colorectal cancer within an enhanced recovery programmeBritish Journal of Surgery, 2005
- Treatment strategy for patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous irresectable liver metastasesBritish Journal of Surgery, 2005
- Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trialThe Lancet Oncology, 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
- Prospective Comparison of Laparoscopic vs. Open Resections for Colorectal Adenocarcinoma Over a Ten-Year PeriodDiseases of the Colon & Rectum, 2003
- Wound complications of laparoscopic vs open colectomySurgical Endoscopy, 2002
- Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery For Colorectal CarcinomaSurgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques, 2002
- Adjuvant chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil and levamisole) in Dukes’ B and C colorectal carcinoma. A cost-effectiveness analysisAnnals Of Oncology, 1997