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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology 2016-02, Vol.14 (2), p.271-278.e2
Hauptverfasser: 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
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 &amp; 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 &lt; .001). Inpatient hospitalization length of stay was reduced by 2.81 nights per patient (95% confidence interval, 2.69–2.94; P &lt; .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 &amp; 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 &lt; .001). Inpatient hospitalization length of stay was reduced by 2.81 nights per patient (95% confidence interval, 2.69–2.94; P &lt; .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 &amp; 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 &lt; .001). Inpatient hospitalization length of stay was reduced by 2.81 nights per patient (95% confidence interval, 2.69–2.94; P &lt; .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