...
首页> 外文期刊>ANZ journal of surgery. >Cost‐effectiveness comparison of delayed versus immediate coloanal anastomosis following ultralow anterior resection for rectal cancer
【24h】

Cost‐effectiveness comparison of delayed versus immediate coloanal anastomosis following ultralow anterior resection for rectal cancer

机译:Cost‐effectiveness comparison of delayed versus immediate coloanal anastomosis following ultralow anterior resection for rectal cancer

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Abstract Background Following ultralow anterior resection for distal rectal cancers, a coloanal anastomosis is usually created along with a defunctioning ileostomy (DI). Recent evidence suggests that abdominoperineal pull‐through with delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCAA) is a viable alternative to immediate coloanal anastomosis (ICAA), minimizing the risk of anastomotic leakage and avoiding the need for stoma creation with the risk of stoma‐associated morbidity. However, DCAA requires a longer initial hospitalization. We aimed to perform a cost‐effectiveness analysis to compare DCAA versus ICAA for elective rectal cancer surgery. Methods A decision tree model was used to compare the cost‐effectiveness of the two strategies. Cost data were obtained from the 2019 to 2020 United Kingdom National Health Service reference costs. Model probabilities were derived from published studies. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate the robustness of the results. Results DCAA was the overall cheaper strategy at £13?541 compared with £14?856 for ICAA in the base case analysis. This was explained by the decreased overall costs of hospitalization/surgery, reduction in costs associated with anastomotic or stoma‐related complications, specifically dehydration‐induced hospital readmissions and avoidance of stoma maintenance costs. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that DCAA remained consistently more inexpensive except when the duration of total parenteral nutrition exceeded 14?days. Conclusion Despite a longer index hospitalization with higher initial costs, this economic analysis demonstrates that DCAA without stoma is overall more cost‐effective compared with ICAA with DI following ultralow anterior resection. Cost savings should be considered an additional benefit when selecting the DCAA approach for rectal cancer surgery.

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号