Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cost-Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer

  • Healthcare Policy and Outcomes
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

A recent randomized trial comparing minimally invasive (MIE) and open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer reported improved short-term outcomes. However, MIE has increased operative costs, and it is unclear whether the short-term benefits of MIE outweigh the increased operative costs. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of MIE compared to open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Methods

A decision-analysis model was developed to estimate the expected costs and outcomes after MIE and open esophagectomy from a health care system perspective with a time horizon of 1 year. Costs were represented in 2012 Canadian dollars, and effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis assessed parameter uncertainty.

Results

MIE was estimated to cost $1641 (95 % confidence interval 1565, 1718) less than open esophagectomy, with an incremental gain of 0.022 QALYs (95 % confidence interval 0.021, 0.023). MIE was therefore dominant over open esophagectomy. On deterministic sensitivity analyses, the results were most sensitive to variations in length of stay. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated the robustness of the base case result, with 66, 77, and 82 % probabilities of cost-effectiveness at willingness-to-pay thresholds of $0/QALY, $50,000/QALY, and $100,000/QALY, respectively.

Conclusions

MIE is cost-effective compared to open esophagectomy in patients with resectable esophageal cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Finks JF, Osborne NH, Birkmeyer JD. Trends in hospital volume and operative mortality for high-risk surgery. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2128–37.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Hulscher JB, van Sandick JW, de Boer AG, et al. Extended transthoracic resection compared with limited transhiatal resection for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1662–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cuschieri A, Shimi S, Banting S. Endoscopic oesophagectomy through a right thoracoscopic approach. J R Coll Surg Edinburgh. 1992;37:7–11.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Luketich JD, Alvelo-Rivera M, Buenaventura PO, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy: outcomes in 222 patients. Ann Surg. 2003;238:486–94.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Palanivelu C, Prakash A, Senthilkumar R, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy: thoracoscopic mobilization of the esophagus and mediastinal lymphadenectomy in prone position—experience of 130 patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2006;203:7–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Safranek PM, Cubitt J, Booth MI, Dehn TC. Review of open and minimal access approaches to oesophagectomy for cancer. Br J Surg. 2010;97:1845–53.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Verhage RJ, Hazebroek EJ, Boone J, Van Hillegersberg R. Minimally invasive surgery compared to open procedures in esophagectomy for cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Min Chir. 2009;64:135–46.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Dantoc M, Cox MR, Eslick GD. Evidence to support the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. Arch Surg. 2012;147:768–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mamidanna R, Bottle A, Aylin P, Faiz O, Hanna GB. Short-term outcomes following open versus minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer in England: a population-based national study. Ann Surg. 2012;255:197–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Biere SS, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Maas KW, et al. Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;379(9829):1887–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Health care trend rate. http://www.actuaries.ca/members/publications/2012/212031e.pdf. Accessed 23 Jan, 2012.

  12. PPP Benchmark results 2008. http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=CPL. Accessed 6 Jan, 2013.

  13. Hanmer J. Predicting an SF-6D preference-based score using MCS and PCS scores from the SF-12 or SF-36. Value Health. 2009;12:958–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kontodimopoulos N, Aletras VH, Paliouras D, Niakas D. Mapping the cancer-specific EORTC QLQ-C30 to the preference-based EQ-5D, SF-6D, and 15D instruments. Value Health. 2009;12:1151–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Derogar M, Orsini N, Sadr-Azodi O, Lagergren P. Influence of major postoperative complications on health-related quality of life among long-term survivors of esophageal cancer surgery. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:1615–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ubel PA. How stable are people’s preferences for giving priority to severely ill patients? Soc Sci Med. 1999;49:895–903.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Nagpal K, Ahmed K, Vats A, et al. Is minimally invasive surgery beneficial in the management of esophageal cancer? A meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:1621–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lazzarino AI, Nagpal K, Bottle A, Faiz O, Moorthy K, Aylin P. Open versus minimally invasive esophagectomy: trends of utilization and associated outcomes in England. Ann Surg. 2010;252:292–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sgourakis G, Gockel I, Radtke A, et al. Minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy: meta-analysis of outcomes. Dig Dis Sci. 2010;55:3031–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Parameswaran R, Veeramootoo D, Krishnadas R, Cooper M, Berrisford R, Wajed S. Comparative experience of open and minimally invasive esophagogastric resection. World J Surg. 2009;33:1868–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Jensen CC, Prasad LM, Abcarian H. Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic vs open resection for colon and rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2012;55:1017–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Nguyen NT, Goldman C, Rosenquist CJ, et al. Laparoscopic versus open gastric bypass: a randomized study of outcomes, quality of life, and costs. Ann Surg. 2001;234:279–89.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Falcone T, Paraiso MF, Mascha E. Prospective randomized clinical trial of laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;180:955–62.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Wolf JS Jr, Merion RM, Leichtman AB, et al. Randomized controlled trial of hand-assisted laparoscopic versus open surgical live donor nephrectomy. Transplantation. 2001;72:284–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Heikkinen TJ, Haukipuro K, Koivukangas P, et al. Comparison of costs between laparoscopic and open Nissen fundoplication: a prospective randomized study with a 3-month followup. J Am Coll Surg. 1999;188:368–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Kuo EY, Chang Y, Wright CD. Impact of hospital volume on clinical and economic outcomes for esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2001;72:1118–24.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Migliore M, Choong CK, Lim E, Goldsmith KA, Ritchie A, Wells FC. A surgeon’s case volume of oesophagectomy for cancer strongly influences the operative mortality rate. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2007;32:375–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Sundelof M, Lagergren J, Ye W. Surgical factors influencing outcomes in patients resected for cancer of the esophagus or gastric cardia. World J Surg. 2008;32:2357–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Briez N, Piessen G, Bonnetain F, et al. Open versus laparoscopically-assisted oesophagectomy for cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled phase III trial—the MIRO trial. BMC Cancer. 2011;11:310.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. van der Sluis PC, Ruurda JP, van der Horst S, et al. Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy versus open transthoracic esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer: a randomized controlled trial (ROBOT trial). Trials. 2012;13:230.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Braghetto I, Csendes A, Cardemil G, Burdiles P, Korn O, Valladares H. Open transthoracic or transhiatal esophagectomy versus minimally invasive esophagectomy in terms of morbidity, mortality and survival. Surg Endosc. 2006;20:1681–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Fabian T, Martin JT, McKelvey AA, Federico JA. Minimally invasive esophagectomy: a teaching hospital’s first year experience. Dis Esophagus. 2008;21:220–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Nafteux P, Moons J, Coosemans W, et al. Minimally invasive oesophagectomy: a valuable alternative to open oesophagectomy for the treatment of early oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junction carcinoma. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011;40:1455–63.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Smithers BM, Gotley DC, Martin I, Thomas JM. Comparison of the outcomes between open and minimally invasive esophagectomy. Ann Surg. 2007;245:232–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Sundaram A, Geronimo JC, Willer BL, et al. Survival and quality of life after minimally invasive esophagectomy: a single-surgeon experience. Surg Endosc. 2012;26:168–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Parameswaran R, Titcomb DR, Blencowe NS, et al. Assessment and comparison of recovery after open and minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer: an exploratory study in two centers. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:1970–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Kunisaki C, Hatori S, Imada T, et al. Video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy with a voice-controlled robot: the AESOP system. Surg Laparoscop Endoscop Percutan Techniques. 2004;14:323–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Nguyen NT, Follette DM, Wolfe BM, Schneider PD, Roberts P, Goodnight JE Jr. Comparison of minimally invasive esophagectomy with transthoracic and transhiatal esophagectomy. Arch Surg. 2000;135:920–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Pham TH, Perry KA, Dolan JP, et al. Comparison of perioperative outcomes after combined thoracoscopic–laparoscopic esophagectomy and open Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. Am J Surg. 2010;199:594–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Sihag S, Wright CD, Wain JC, et al. Comparison of perioperative outcomes following open versus minimally invasive Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy at a single, high-volume centre. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2012;42:430–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Zingg U, McQuinn A, DiValentino D, et al. Minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy for patients with esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009;87:911–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Stylopoulos N, Gazelle GS, Rattner DW. Paraesophageal hernias: operation or observation? Ann Surg. 2002;236:492–500.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Steinberg-Bernstein Centre for Minimally Invasive Surgery and Innovation, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Lawrence Lee MD, MSc, Chao Li MD, MSc, Gerald M. Fried MD, Liane S. Feldman MD & Lorenzo E. Ferri MD, PhD

  2. Division of Thoracic Surgery, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Monisha Sudarshan MD, MPH, David S. Mulder MD & Lorenzo E. Ferri MD, PhD

  3. Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Eric Latimer PhD

Authors
  1. Lawrence Lee MD, MSc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Monisha Sudarshan MD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chao Li MD, MSc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Eric Latimer PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gerald M. Fried MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. David S. Mulder MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Liane S. Feldman MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Lorenzo E. Ferri MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lorenzo E. Ferri MD, PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lee, L., Sudarshan, M., Li, C. et al. Cost-Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 20, 3732–3739 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-013-3103-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-013-3103-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation