title: Laparoscopic versus open colorectal resection for cancer and polyps: a cost-effectiveness study.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Available evidence that compares outcomes from laparoscopic and open surgery for colorectal cancer shows no difference in disease free or survival time, or in health-related quality of life outcomes, but does not capture the short term benefits of laparoscopic methods in the early postoperative period.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To explore the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic colorectal surgery, compared to open methods, using quality of life data gathered in the first 6 weeks after surgery.
  
  
  METHODS
  Participants were recruited in 2006-2007 in a district general hospital in the south of England; those with a diagnosis of cancer or polyps were included in the analysis. Quality of life data were collected using EQ-5D, on alternate days after surgery for 4 weeks. Costs per patient, from a National Health Service perspective (in British pounds, 2006) comprised the sum of operative, hospital, and community costs. Missing data were filled using multiple imputation methods. The difference in mean quality adjusted life years and costs between surgery groups were estimated simultaneously using a multivariate regression model applied to 20 imputed datasets. The probability that laparoscopic surgery is cost-effective compared to open surgery for a given societal willingness-to-pay threshold is illustrated using a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The sample comprised 68 laparoscopic and 27 open surgery patients. At 28 days, the incremental cost per quality adjusted life year gained from laparoscopic surgery was £12,375. At a societal willingness-to-pay of £30,000, the probability that laparoscopic surgery is cost-effective, exceeds 65% (at £20,000 ≈60%). In sensitivity analyses, laparoscopic surgery remained cost-effective compared to open surgery, provided it results in a saving ≥£699 in hospital bed days and takes no more than 8 minutes longer to perform.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The study provides formal evidence of the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic approaches and supports current guidelines that promote use of laparoscopy where suitably trained surgeons are available.
authors.affiliation: Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex, England.
authors.forename: Jake
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Jordan
authors.affiliation: Frimley Park Hospital, Surrey, England.
authors.forename: Henry
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Dowson
authors.affiliation: School of Economics, University of Surrey, Surrey, England.
authors.forename: Heather
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Gage
authors.affiliation: School of Economics, University of Surrey, Surrey, England.
authors.forename: Daniel
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Jackson
authors.affiliation: Royal Surrey County Hospital, Surrey, England.
authors.forename: Timothy
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Rockall
keywords: QALYs; colorectal cancer; cost-effectiveness; laparoscopy