Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Real-world cost-effectiveness of laparoscopy versus open colectomy for colon cancer: a nationwide population-based study

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopic colectomy is increasingly being adopted for the treatment of colon cancer; however, the long-term effectiveness of this approach in a real-world clinical setting has yet to be verified. This study aims to compare the effectiveness and costs associated with laparoscopic and open colectomy from the perspective of the National Health Insurance (NHI) system in Taiwan.

Methods

A nationwide population-based colon cancer cohort was observed by linking the Taiwan Cancer Registry, claims data from NHI system, and the National Death Registry. Adult patients with Stage I to Stage III colon cancer who underwent primary cancer resection using either laparoscopy or open colectomy between 2009 and 2011 were included. A propensity score-matched cohort (1745 pairs) was applied to examine three clinical endpoints: overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and disease-free survival within 2 years after the operation. To comply with the perspective as well as the analytic horizon of the study, we limited the research to NHI claims from the study population for the corresponding time period. The health outcomes and net monetary benefits were verified by multivariate mixed-effect models.

Results

This analysis revealed that laparoscopy resulted in longer overall survival (adjusted difference 16.8 days, 95 % CI 7.3–26.2), recurrence-free survival (16.8 days, 5.0–28.6) and disease-free survival (26.4 days, 7.4–45.4), compared to open colectomy at 2 years post-op. Laparoscopy also led to a significantly shorter length of stay (3.2 days, 2.4–3.9) and lower index hospitalization costs (US$ 455, 181–729) than open colectomy; however, no differences in costs were observed over the long term. Overall, laparoscopy was more cost-effective than open colectomy under various willingness-to-pay thresholds in the setting of the Taiwan NHI.

Conclusions

The continued adoption of laparoscopy in primary curable colon cancer resection is expected to reduce health care costs over the short term while providing considerable health benefits over the long term.

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
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lorenzon L, La Torre M, Ziparo V, Montebelli F, Mercantini P, Balducci G, Ferri M (2014) Evidence based medicine and surgical approaches for colon cancer: evidences, benefits and limitations of the laparoscopic vs open resection. World J Gastroenterol 20:3680–3692

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Buunen M, Veldkamp R, Hop WC, Kuhry E, Jeekel J, Haglind E, Pahlman L, Cuesta MA, Msika S, Morino M, Lacy A, Bonjer HJ (2009) Survival after laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: long-term outcome of a randomised clinical trial. Lancet Oncol 10:44–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Veldkamp R, Kuhry E, Hop WC, Jeekel J, Kazemier G, Bonjer HJ, Haglind E, Pahlman L, Cuesta MA, Msika S, Morino M, Lacy AM (2005) Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 6:477–484

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fleshman J, Sargent DJ, Green E, Anvari M, Stryker SJ, Beart RW Jr, Hellinger M, Flanagan R Jr, Peters W, Nelson H (2007) Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on 5-year data from the COST Study Group trial. Ann Surg 246:655–662 (discussion 662–654)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group (2004) A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med 350:2050–2059

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bagshaw PF, Allardyce RA, Frampton CM, Frizelle FA, Hewett PJ, McMurrick PJ, Rieger NA, Smith JS, Solomon MJ, Stevenson AR (2012) Long-term outcomes of the australasian randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and conventional open surgical treatments for colon cancer: the Australasian Laparoscopic Colon Cancer Study trial. Ann Surg 256:915–919

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lacy AM, Delgado S, Castells A, Prins HA, Arroyo V, Ibarzabal A, Pique JM (2008) The long-term results of a randomized clinical trial of laparoscopy-assisted versus open surgery for colon cancer. Ann Surg 248:1–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lacy AM, Garcia-Valdecasas JC, Delgado S, Castells A, Taura P, Pique JM, Visa J (2002) Laparoscopy-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet (London, England) 359:2224–2229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Odermatt M, Miskovic D, Siddiqi N, Khan J, Parvaiz A (2013) Short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic versus open emergency resection for colon cancer: an observational propensity score-matched study. World J Surg 37:2458–2467

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Zheng MH, Feng B, Lu AG, Li JW, Wang ML, Mao ZH, Hu YY, Dong F, Hu WG, Li DH, Zang L, Peng YF, Yu BM (2005) Laparoscopic versus open right hemicolectomy with curative intent for colon carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol 11:323–326

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Vaid S, Tucker J, Bell T, Grim R, Ahuja V (2012) Cost analysis of laparoscopic versus open colectomy in patients with colon cancer: results from a large nationwide population database. Am Surg 78:635–641

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Juo YY, Hyder O, Haider AH, Camp M, Lidor A, Ahuja N (2014) Is minimally invasive colon resection better than traditional approaches? First comprehensive national examination with propensity score matching. JAMA Surg 149:177–184

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Janson M, Bjorholt I, Carlsson P, Haglind E, Henriksson M, Lindholm E, Anderberg B (2004) Randomized clinical trial of the costs of open and laparoscopic surgery for colonic cancer. Br J Surg 91:409–417

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hernandez RA, de Verteuil RM, Fraser CM, Vale LD (2008) Systematic review of economic evaluations of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 10:859–868

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Aly OE, Quayyum Z (2012) Has laparoscopic colorectal surgery become more cost-effective over time? Int J Colorectal Dis 27:855–860

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bureau of National Health Insurance, Department of Health, Executive Yuan, Taiwan (2012) Universal Health Coverage in Taiwan. http://www.nhi.gov.tw/Resource/webdata/21717_1_20120808UniversalHealthCoverage.pdf. Accessed 1 Aug 2016

  17. Renehan AG, Egger M, Saunders MP, O’Dwyer ST (2002) Impact on survival of intensive follow up after curative resection for colorectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. Br Med J 324:813

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Desch CE, Benson AB 3rd, Somerfield MR, Flynn PJ, Krause C, Loprinzi CL, Minsky BD, Pfister DG, Virgo KS, Petrelli NJ (2005) Colorectal cancer surveillance: 2005 update of an American Society of Clinical Oncology practice guideline. J Clin Oncol 23:8512–8519

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Guyot F, Faivre J, Manfredi S, Meny B, Bonithon-Kopp C, Bouvier AM (2005) Time trends in the treatment and survival of recurrences from colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol 16:756–761

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Punt CJ, Buyse M, Kohne CH, Hohenberger P, Labianca R, Schmoll HJ, Pahlman L, Sobrero A, Douillard JY (2007) Endpoints in adjuvant treatment trials: a systematic review of the literature in colon cancer and proposed definitions for future trials. J Natl Cancer Inst 99:998–1003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hoch JS, Briggs AH, Willan AR (2002) Something old, something new, something borrowed, something blue: a framework for the marriage of health econometrics and cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ 11:415–430

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Allaix ME, Giraudo G, Mistrangelo M, Arezzo A, Morino M (2015) Laparoscopic versus open resection for colon cancer: 10-year outcomes of a prospective clinical trial. Surg Endosc 29:916–924

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Damle RN, Macomber CW, Flahive JM, Davids JS, Sweeney WB, Sturrock PR, Maykel JA, Santry HP, Alavi K (2014) Surgeon volume and elective resection for colon cancer: an analysis of outcomes and use of laparoscopy. J Am Coll Surg 218:1223–1230

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Drolet S, MacLean AR, Myers RP, Shaheen AA, Dixon E, Buie WD (2011) Elective resection of colon cancer by high-volume surgeons is associated with decreased morbidity and mortality. J Gastroint Surg 15:541–550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Thompson BS, Coory MD, Gordon LG, Lumley JW (2014) Cost savings for elective laparoscopic resection compared with open resection for colorectal cancer in a region of high uptake. Surg Endosc 28:1515–1521

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ramji KM, Cleghorn MC, Josse JM, MacNeill A, O’Brien C, Urbach D, Quereshy FA (2016) Comparison of clinical and economic outcomes between robotic, laparoscopic, and open rectal cancer surgery: early experience at a tertiary care center. Surg Endosc 30:1337–1343

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Keller DS, Delaney CP, Hashemi L, Haas EM (2015) A national evaluation of clinical and economic outcomes in open versus laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc. doi:10.1007/s00464-015-4732-6

    Google Scholar 

  28. Steele SR, Brown TA, Rush RM, Martin MJ (2008) Laparoscopic vs open colectomy for colon cancer: results from a large nationwide population-based analysis. J Gastroint Surg 12:583–591

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Health Policy and Management, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Room 637, No. 17, Xu-Zhou Road, Taipei, 100, Taiwan

    Chih-Hsien Liao, Elise Chia-Hui Tan & Ming-Chin Yang

  2. Department of Surgery, Koo Foundation Sun Yat-Sen Cancer Center, Taipei, Taiwan

    Chien-Chih Chen

Authors
  1. Chih-Hsien Liao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elise Chia-Hui Tan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chien-Chih Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ming-Chin Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ming-Chin Yang.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Chih-Hsien Liao, Elise Chia-Hui Tan, Chien-Chih Chen, Ming-Chin Yang have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 13 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liao, CH., Tan, E.CH., Chen, CC. et al. Real-world cost-effectiveness of laparoscopy versus open colectomy for colon cancer: a nationwide population-based study. Surg Endosc 31, 1796–1805 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5176-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5176-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation