Sceats Lindsay A, Ku Seul, Coughran Alanna, Barnes Britainy, Grimm Emily, Muffly Matthew, Spain David A, Kin Cindy, Owens Douglas K, Goldhaber-Fiebert Jeremy D
Stanford-Surgery Policy Improvement Research and Education (S-SPIRE) Center, Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
MDM Policy Pract. 2019 Aug 17;4(2):2381468319866448. doi: 10.1177/2381468319866448. eCollection 2019 Jul-Dec.
Recent clinical trials suggest that nonoperative management (NOM) of patients with acute, uncomplicated appendicitis is an acceptable alternative to surgery. However, limited data exist comparing the long-term cost-effectiveness of nonoperative treatment strategies. We constructed a Markov model comparing the cost-effectiveness of three treatment strategies for uncomplicated appendicitis: 1) laparoscopic appendectomy, 2) inpatient NOM, and 3) outpatient NOM. The model assessed lifetime costs and outcomes from a third-party payer perspective. The preferred strategy was the one yielding the greatest utility without exceeding a $50,000 willingness-to-pay threshold. Outpatient NOM cost $233,700 over a lifetime; laparoscopic appendectomy cost $2500 more while inpatient NOM cost $7300 more. Outpatient NOM generated 24.9270 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), while laparoscopic appendectomy and inpatient NOM yielded 0.0709 and 0.0005 additional QALYs, respectively. Laparoscopic appendectomy was cost-effective compared with outpatient NOM (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio $32,300 per QALY gained); inpatient NOM was dominated by laparoscopic appendectomy. In one-way sensitivity analyses, the preferred strategy changed when varying perioperative mortality, probability of appendiceal malignancy or recurrent appendicitis after NOM, probability of a complicated recurrence, and appendectomy cost. A two-way sensitivity analysis showed that the rates of NOM failure and appendicitis recurrence described in randomized trials exceeded the values required for NOM to be preferred. There are limited NOM data to generate long-term model probabilities. Health state utilities were often drawn from single studies and may significantly influence model outcomes. Laparoscopic appendectomy is a cost-effective treatment for acute uncomplicated appendicitis over a lifetime time horizon. Inpatient NOM was never the preferred strategy in the scenarios considered here. These results emphasize the importance of considering long-term costs and outcomes when evaluating NOM.
近期的临床试验表明,对于急性单纯性阑尾炎患者,非手术治疗(NOM)是一种可接受的手术替代方案。然而,比较非手术治疗策略长期成本效益的数据有限。我们构建了一个马尔可夫模型,比较了三种治疗单纯性阑尾炎策略的成本效益:1)腹腔镜阑尾切除术,2)住院非手术治疗,3)门诊非手术治疗。该模型从第三方支付者的角度评估了终身成本和结果。首选策略是在不超过50,000美元支付意愿阈值的情况下产生最大效用的策略。门诊非手术治疗终身成本为233,700美元;腹腔镜阑尾切除术成本多2500美元,而住院非手术治疗成本多7300美元。门诊非手术治疗产生了24.9270个质量调整生命年(QALY),而腹腔镜阑尾切除术和住院非手术治疗分别产生了0.0709和0.0005个额外的QALY。与门诊非手术治疗相比,腹腔镜阑尾切除术具有成本效益(每获得一个QALY的增量成本效益比为32,300美元);住院非手术治疗被腹腔镜阑尾切除术主导。在单向敏感性分析中,当围手术期死亡率、非手术治疗后阑尾恶性肿瘤或复发性阑尾炎的概率、复杂复发的概率以及阑尾切除术成本发生变化时,首选策略会改变。双向敏感性分析表明,随机试验中描述的非手术治疗失败率和阑尾炎复发率超过了非手术治疗成为首选所需的值。用于生成长期模型概率的非手术治疗数据有限。健康状态效用通常来自单一研究,可能会显著影响模型结果。在终身时间范围内,腹腔镜阑尾切除术是治疗急性单纯性阑尾炎的一种具有成本效益的治疗方法。在这里考虑的情况下,住院非手术治疗从未成为首选策略。这些结果强调了在评估非手术治疗时考虑长期成本和结果的重要性。