Division of Surgery, Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, and the Department of Health Services Research, the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; and the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jul;132(1):52-58. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002677.
To evaluate the cost-utility of three lymphadenectomy strategies in the management of low-risk endometrial carcinoma.
A decision analysis model compared three lymphadenectomy strategies in women undergoing minimally invasive surgery for low-risk endometrial carcinoma: 1) routine lymphadenectomy in all patients, 2) selective lymphadenectomy based on intraoperative frozen section criteria, and 3) sentinel lymph node mapping. Costs and outcomes were obtained from published literature and Medicare reimbursement rates. Costs categories consisted of hospital, physician, operating room, pathology, and lymphedema treatment. Effectiveness was defined as 3-year disease-specific survival adjusted for the effect of lymphedema (utility=0.8) on quality of life. A cost-utility analysis was performed comparing the different strategies. Multiple deterministic sensitivity analyses were done.
In the base-case scenario, routine lymphadenectomy had a cost of $18,041 and an effectiveness of 2.79 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Selective lymphadenectomy had a cost of $17,036 and an effectiveness of 2.81 QALYs, whereas sentinel lymph node mapping had a cost of $16,401 and an effectiveness of 2.87 QALYs. With a difference of $1,005 and 0.02 QALYs, selective lymphadenectomy was both less costly and more effective than routine lymphadenectomy, dominating it. However, with the lowest cost and highest effectiveness, sentinel lymph node mapping dominated the other modalities and was the most cost-effective strategy. These findings were robust to multiple sensitivity analyses varying the rates of lymphedema and lymphadenectomy, surgical approach (open or minimally invasive surgery), lymphedema utility, and costs. For the estimated 40,000 women undergoing surgery for low-risk endometrial carcinoma each year in the United States, the annual cost of routine lymphadenectomy, selective lymphadenectomy, and sentinel lymph node mapping would be $722 million, $681 million, and $656 million, respectively.
Compared with routine and selective lymphadenectomy, sentinel lymph node mapping had the lowest costs and highest quality-adjusted survival, making it the most cost-effective strategy in the management of low-risk endometrial carcinoma.
评估三种淋巴结清扫策略在低危子宫内膜癌治疗中的成本效用。
决策分析模型比较了三种淋巴结清扫策略在接受微创治疗的低危子宫内膜癌患者中的应用:1)所有患者常规淋巴结清扫,2)基于术中冷冻切片标准的选择性淋巴结清扫,3)前哨淋巴结绘图。成本和结果来自已发表的文献和医疗保险报销率。成本类别包括医院、医生、手术室、病理和淋巴水肿治疗。有效性定义为 3 年疾病特异性生存率,考虑到淋巴水肿(效用=0.8)对生活质量的影响。通过不同策略进行成本效用分析。进行了多次确定性敏感性分析。
在基本情况下,常规淋巴结清扫的成本为 18041 美元,有效性为 2.79 个质量调整生命年(QALY)。选择性淋巴结清扫的成本为 17036 美元,有效性为 2.81 QALY,而前哨淋巴结绘图的成本为 16401 美元,有效性为 2.87 QALY。选择性淋巴结清扫的成本低 1005 美元,有效性高 0.02 QALY,因此优于常规淋巴结清扫。然而,由于成本最低,效果最高,前哨淋巴结绘图优于其他方式,是最具成本效益的策略。这些发现对多种敏感性分析结果具有稳健性,这些分析结果改变了淋巴水肿和淋巴结清扫的发生率、手术方法(开放或微创手术)、淋巴水肿效用和成本。对于美国每年约 40000 例接受低危子宫内膜癌手术的患者,常规淋巴结清扫、选择性淋巴结清扫和前哨淋巴结绘图的年成本分别为 7.22 亿美元、6.81 亿美元和 6.56 亿美元。
与常规和选择性淋巴结清扫相比,前哨淋巴结绘图的成本最低,质量调整生存率最高,使其成为低危子宫内膜癌治疗中最具成本效益的策略。