Cost Analysis of Endoscopic Mucosal Resection vs Surgery for Large Laterally Spreading Colorectal Lesions
Background & Aims Large laterally spreading lesions (LSL) in the colon and rectum can be safely and effectively removed by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). However, many patients still undergo surgery. Endoscopic treatment may be more cost effective. We compared the costs of endoscopic versus...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology 2016-02, Vol.14 (2), p.271-278.e2 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 278.e2 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 271 |
container_title | Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology |
container_volume | 14 |
creator | Jayanna, Mahesh Burgess, Nicholas G Singh, Rajvinder Hourigan, Luke F Brown, Gregor J Zanati, Simon A Moss, Alan Lim, James Sonson, Rebecca Williams, Stephen J Bourke, Michael J |
description | Background & Aims Large laterally spreading lesions (LSL) in the colon and rectum can be safely and effectively removed by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). However, many patients still undergo surgery. Endoscopic treatment may be more cost effective. We compared the costs of endoscopic versus surgical management of large LSL. Methods We performed a prospective, observational, multicenter study of consecutive patients referred to 1 of 7 academic hospitals in Australia for the management of large LSL (≥20 mm) from January 2010 to December 2013. We collected data on numbers of patients undergoing EMR, actual endoscopic management costs (index colonoscopy, hospital stay, adverse events, and first surveillance colonoscopy), characteristics of patients and lesions, outcomes, and adverse events, and findings from follow-up examinations 14 days, 4–6 months, and 16–18 months after treatment. We compared data from patients who underwent EMR with those from a model in which all patients underwent surgery without any complications. Event-specific costs, based on Australian refined diagnosis-related group codes, were used to estimate average cost per patient. Results EMR was performed on 1489 lesions (mean size, 36 mm) in 1353 patients (mean age, 67 years; 52.1% male). Total costs involved in the endoscopic management of large LSL were US $6,316,593 and total inpatient hospitalization length of stay was 1180 days. The total cost predicted for the surgical management group was US $16,601,502, with a total inpatient hospitalization length of stay of 4986 days. Endoscopic management produced a potential total cost saving of US $10,284,909; the mean cost difference per patient was US $7602 (95% confidence interval, $8458–$9220; P < .001). Inpatient hospitalization length of stay was reduced by 2.81 nights per patient (95% confidence interval, 2.69–2.94; P < .001). Conclusions In a large multicenter study, endoscopic management of large LSL by EMR was significantly more cost-effective than surgery. Endoscopic management by EMR at an appropriately experienced and resourced tertiary center should be considered the first line of therapy for most patients with this disorder. This approach is likely to deliver substantial overall health expenditure savings. ClinicalTrials.gov , Number: NCT01368289. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.cgh.2015.08.037 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1760885520</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S154235651501201X</els_id><sourcerecordid>1760885520</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-b3ed50ad7ca91105fad8e1a75ce35b1360ec13b822de30e3f0607ccac79ab2e33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU2r1DAUhoso3g_9AW4kSzdTT5qmHwjCZbjXK1QER8FdSNPTMTXTjDnthf4bf4u_zJQZXbhwlRN4nxfOc5LkBYeUAy9eD6nZf0sz4DKFKgVRPkouucyzTVny_PF5FrKQF8kV0QCQ1XldPk0uskIUeVHWl8mw9TSxm1G7hSwx37PbsfNk_NEa9mE2nrRjn5DQTNaP7IHYbg57DAvrffj1s9Hxwxo9YdDOLWx3DKg7O-7Z1jsfIhXxBimy9Cx50mtH-Pz8Xidf7m4_b-83zcd377c3zcbkUE2bVmAnQXel0TXnIHvdVch1KQ0K2XJRABou2irLOhSAoocCSmO0KWvdZijEdfLq1HsM_seMNKmDJYPO6RH9TIqXBVSVlBnEKD9FTfBEAXt1DPagw6I4qFWxGlRUrFbFCioVFUfm5bl-bg_Y_SX-OI2BN6cAxiUfLAZFxuJosLOrENV5-9_6t__QxtnRGu2-44I0-DnEY8UtFGUK1G698XpiLoHHnq_iN6BMo3M</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1760885520</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cost Analysis of Endoscopic Mucosal Resection vs Surgery for Large Laterally Spreading Colorectal Lesions</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Jayanna, Mahesh ; Burgess, Nicholas G ; Singh, Rajvinder ; Hourigan, Luke F ; Brown, Gregor J ; Zanati, Simon A ; Moss, Alan ; Lim, James ; Sonson, Rebecca ; Williams, Stephen J ; Bourke, Michael J</creator><creatorcontrib>Jayanna, Mahesh ; Burgess, Nicholas G ; Singh, Rajvinder ; Hourigan, Luke F ; Brown, Gregor J ; Zanati, Simon A ; Moss, Alan ; Lim, James ; Sonson, Rebecca ; Williams, Stephen J ; Bourke, Michael J</creatorcontrib><description>Background & Aims Large laterally spreading lesions (LSL) in the colon and rectum can be safely and effectively removed by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). However, many patients still undergo surgery. Endoscopic treatment may be more cost effective. We compared the costs of endoscopic versus surgical management of large LSL. Methods We performed a prospective, observational, multicenter study of consecutive patients referred to 1 of 7 academic hospitals in Australia for the management of large LSL (≥20 mm) from January 2010 to December 2013. We collected data on numbers of patients undergoing EMR, actual endoscopic management costs (index colonoscopy, hospital stay, adverse events, and first surveillance colonoscopy), characteristics of patients and lesions, outcomes, and adverse events, and findings from follow-up examinations 14 days, 4–6 months, and 16–18 months after treatment. We compared data from patients who underwent EMR with those from a model in which all patients underwent surgery without any complications. Event-specific costs, based on Australian refined diagnosis-related group codes, were used to estimate average cost per patient. Results EMR was performed on 1489 lesions (mean size, 36 mm) in 1353 patients (mean age, 67 years; 52.1% male). Total costs involved in the endoscopic management of large LSL were US $6,316,593 and total inpatient hospitalization length of stay was 1180 days. The total cost predicted for the surgical management group was US $16,601,502, with a total inpatient hospitalization length of stay of 4986 days. Endoscopic management produced a potential total cost saving of US $10,284,909; the mean cost difference per patient was US $7602 (95% confidence interval, $8458–$9220; P < .001). Inpatient hospitalization length of stay was reduced by 2.81 nights per patient (95% confidence interval, 2.69–2.94; P < .001). Conclusions In a large multicenter study, endoscopic management of large LSL by EMR was significantly more cost-effective than surgery. Endoscopic management by EMR at an appropriately experienced and resourced tertiary center should be considered the first line of therapy for most patients with this disorder. This approach is likely to deliver substantial overall health expenditure savings. ClinicalTrials.gov , Number: NCT01368289.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1542-3565</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1542-7714</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2015.08.037</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26364679</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Academic Medical Centers ; Aged ; AR-DRG ; Australia ; Colon - surgery ; Colorectal Neoplasms - surgery ; Colorectal Surgery ; Costs and Cost Analysis ; Female ; Gastroenterology and Hepatology ; Humans ; Large Laterally Spreading Lesions ; Male ; Prospective Studies ; Rectum - surgery ; Surgical Procedures, Operative - economics ; Surgical Procedures, Operative - methods ; The Australian Colonic Endoscopic Resection (ACE) study</subject><ispartof>Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology, 2016-02, Vol.14 (2), p.271-278.e2</ispartof><rights>AGA Institute</rights><rights>2016 AGA Institute</rights><rights>Copyright © 2016 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-b3ed50ad7ca91105fad8e1a75ce35b1360ec13b822de30e3f0607ccac79ab2e33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-b3ed50ad7ca91105fad8e1a75ce35b1360ec13b822de30e3f0607ccac79ab2e33</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2015.08.037$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3549,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26364679$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jayanna, Mahesh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burgess, Nicholas G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, Rajvinder</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hourigan, Luke F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Gregor J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zanati, Simon A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moss, Alan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lim, James</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sonson, Rebecca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williams, Stephen J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bourke, Michael J</creatorcontrib><title>Cost Analysis of Endoscopic Mucosal Resection vs Surgery for Large Laterally Spreading Colorectal Lesions</title><title>Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology</title><addtitle>Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol</addtitle><description>Background & Aims Large laterally spreading lesions (LSL) in the colon and rectum can be safely and effectively removed by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). However, many patients still undergo surgery. Endoscopic treatment may be more cost effective. We compared the costs of endoscopic versus surgical management of large LSL. Methods We performed a prospective, observational, multicenter study of consecutive patients referred to 1 of 7 academic hospitals in Australia for the management of large LSL (≥20 mm) from January 2010 to December 2013. We collected data on numbers of patients undergoing EMR, actual endoscopic management costs (index colonoscopy, hospital stay, adverse events, and first surveillance colonoscopy), characteristics of patients and lesions, outcomes, and adverse events, and findings from follow-up examinations 14 days, 4–6 months, and 16–18 months after treatment. We compared data from patients who underwent EMR with those from a model in which all patients underwent surgery without any complications. Event-specific costs, based on Australian refined diagnosis-related group codes, were used to estimate average cost per patient. Results EMR was performed on 1489 lesions (mean size, 36 mm) in 1353 patients (mean age, 67 years; 52.1% male). Total costs involved in the endoscopic management of large LSL were US $6,316,593 and total inpatient hospitalization length of stay was 1180 days. The total cost predicted for the surgical management group was US $16,601,502, with a total inpatient hospitalization length of stay of 4986 days. Endoscopic management produced a potential total cost saving of US $10,284,909; the mean cost difference per patient was US $7602 (95% confidence interval, $8458–$9220; P < .001). Inpatient hospitalization length of stay was reduced by 2.81 nights per patient (95% confidence interval, 2.69–2.94; P < .001). Conclusions In a large multicenter study, endoscopic management of large LSL by EMR was significantly more cost-effective than surgery. Endoscopic management by EMR at an appropriately experienced and resourced tertiary center should be considered the first line of therapy for most patients with this disorder. This approach is likely to deliver substantial overall health expenditure savings. ClinicalTrials.gov , Number: NCT01368289.</description><subject>Academic Medical Centers</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>AR-DRG</subject><subject>Australia</subject><subject>Colon - surgery</subject><subject>Colorectal Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Colorectal Surgery</subject><subject>Costs and Cost Analysis</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gastroenterology and Hepatology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Large Laterally Spreading Lesions</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Rectum - surgery</subject><subject>Surgical Procedures, Operative - economics</subject><subject>Surgical Procedures, Operative - methods</subject><subject>The Australian Colonic Endoscopic Resection (ACE) study</subject><issn>1542-3565</issn><issn>1542-7714</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU2r1DAUhoso3g_9AW4kSzdTT5qmHwjCZbjXK1QER8FdSNPTMTXTjDnthf4bf4u_zJQZXbhwlRN4nxfOc5LkBYeUAy9eD6nZf0sz4DKFKgVRPkouucyzTVny_PF5FrKQF8kV0QCQ1XldPk0uskIUeVHWl8mw9TSxm1G7hSwx37PbsfNk_NEa9mE2nrRjn5DQTNaP7IHYbg57DAvrffj1s9Hxwxo9YdDOLWx3DKg7O-7Z1jsfIhXxBimy9Cx50mtH-Pz8Xidf7m4_b-83zcd377c3zcbkUE2bVmAnQXel0TXnIHvdVch1KQ0K2XJRABou2irLOhSAoocCSmO0KWvdZijEdfLq1HsM_seMNKmDJYPO6RH9TIqXBVSVlBnEKD9FTfBEAXt1DPagw6I4qFWxGlRUrFbFCioVFUfm5bl-bg_Y_SX-OI2BN6cAxiUfLAZFxuJosLOrENV5-9_6t__QxtnRGu2-44I0-DnEY8UtFGUK1G698XpiLoHHnq_iN6BMo3M</recordid><startdate>20160201</startdate><enddate>20160201</enddate><creator>Jayanna, Mahesh</creator><creator>Burgess, Nicholas G</creator><creator>Singh, Rajvinder</creator><creator>Hourigan, Luke F</creator><creator>Brown, Gregor J</creator><creator>Zanati, Simon A</creator><creator>Moss, Alan</creator><creator>Lim, James</creator><creator>Sonson, Rebecca</creator><creator>Williams, Stephen J</creator><creator>Bourke, Michael J</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160201</creationdate><title>Cost Analysis of Endoscopic Mucosal Resection vs Surgery for Large Laterally Spreading Colorectal Lesions</title><author>Jayanna, Mahesh ; Burgess, Nicholas G ; Singh, Rajvinder ; Hourigan, Luke F ; Brown, Gregor J ; Zanati, Simon A ; Moss, Alan ; Lim, James ; Sonson, Rebecca ; Williams, Stephen J ; Bourke, Michael J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-b3ed50ad7ca91105fad8e1a75ce35b1360ec13b822de30e3f0607ccac79ab2e33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Academic Medical Centers</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>AR-DRG</topic><topic>Australia</topic><topic>Colon - surgery</topic><topic>Colorectal Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Colorectal Surgery</topic><topic>Costs and Cost Analysis</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gastroenterology and Hepatology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Large Laterally Spreading Lesions</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Rectum - surgery</topic><topic>Surgical Procedures, Operative - economics</topic><topic>Surgical Procedures, Operative - methods</topic><topic>The Australian Colonic Endoscopic Resection (ACE) study</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jayanna, Mahesh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burgess, Nicholas G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, Rajvinder</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hourigan, Luke F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Gregor J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zanati, Simon A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moss, Alan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lim, James</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sonson, Rebecca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williams, Stephen J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bourke, Michael J</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jayanna, Mahesh</au><au>Burgess, Nicholas G</au><au>Singh, Rajvinder</au><au>Hourigan, Luke F</au><au>Brown, Gregor J</au><au>Zanati, Simon A</au><au>Moss, Alan</au><au>Lim, James</au><au>Sonson, Rebecca</au><au>Williams, Stephen J</au><au>Bourke, Michael J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cost Analysis of Endoscopic Mucosal Resection vs Surgery for Large Laterally Spreading Colorectal Lesions</atitle><jtitle>Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol</addtitle><date>2016-02-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>271</spage><epage>278.e2</epage><pages>271-278.e2</pages><issn>1542-3565</issn><eissn>1542-7714</eissn><abstract>Background & Aims Large laterally spreading lesions (LSL) in the colon and rectum can be safely and effectively removed by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). However, many patients still undergo surgery. Endoscopic treatment may be more cost effective. We compared the costs of endoscopic versus surgical management of large LSL. Methods We performed a prospective, observational, multicenter study of consecutive patients referred to 1 of 7 academic hospitals in Australia for the management of large LSL (≥20 mm) from January 2010 to December 2013. We collected data on numbers of patients undergoing EMR, actual endoscopic management costs (index colonoscopy, hospital stay, adverse events, and first surveillance colonoscopy), characteristics of patients and lesions, outcomes, and adverse events, and findings from follow-up examinations 14 days, 4–6 months, and 16–18 months after treatment. We compared data from patients who underwent EMR with those from a model in which all patients underwent surgery without any complications. Event-specific costs, based on Australian refined diagnosis-related group codes, were used to estimate average cost per patient. Results EMR was performed on 1489 lesions (mean size, 36 mm) in 1353 patients (mean age, 67 years; 52.1% male). Total costs involved in the endoscopic management of large LSL were US $6,316,593 and total inpatient hospitalization length of stay was 1180 days. The total cost predicted for the surgical management group was US $16,601,502, with a total inpatient hospitalization length of stay of 4986 days. Endoscopic management produced a potential total cost saving of US $10,284,909; the mean cost difference per patient was US $7602 (95% confidence interval, $8458–$9220; P < .001). Inpatient hospitalization length of stay was reduced by 2.81 nights per patient (95% confidence interval, 2.69–2.94; P < .001). Conclusions In a large multicenter study, endoscopic management of large LSL by EMR was significantly more cost-effective than surgery. Endoscopic management by EMR at an appropriately experienced and resourced tertiary center should be considered the first line of therapy for most patients with this disorder. This approach is likely to deliver substantial overall health expenditure savings. ClinicalTrials.gov , Number: NCT01368289.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>26364679</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.cgh.2015.08.037</doi></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1542-3565 |
ispartof | Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology, 2016-02, Vol.14 (2), p.271-278.e2 |
issn | 1542-3565 1542-7714 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1760885520 |
source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
subjects | Academic Medical Centers Aged AR-DRG Australia Colon - surgery Colorectal Neoplasms - surgery Colorectal Surgery Costs and Cost Analysis Female Gastroenterology and Hepatology Humans Large Laterally Spreading Lesions Male Prospective Studies Rectum - surgery Surgical Procedures, Operative - economics Surgical Procedures, Operative - methods The Australian Colonic Endoscopic Resection (ACE) study |
title | Cost Analysis of Endoscopic Mucosal Resection vs Surgery for Large Laterally Spreading Colorectal Lesions |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T03%3A52%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cost%20Analysis%20of%20Endoscopic%20Mucosal%20Resection%20vs%20Surgery%20for%C2%A0Large%20Laterally%20Spreading%20Colorectal%20Lesions&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20gastroenterology%20and%20hepatology&rft.au=Jayanna,%20Mahesh&rft.date=2016-02-01&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=271&rft.epage=278.e2&rft.pages=271-278.e2&rft.issn=1542-3565&rft.eissn=1542-7714&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.cgh.2015.08.037&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1760885520%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1760885520&rft_id=info:pmid/26364679&rft_els_id=S154235651501201X&rfr_iscdi=true |