Cargando…
A Cost-Utility Analysis of Mesh Prophylaxis in the Prevention of Incisional Hernias following Stoma Closure Surgery
Background: Stoma closure is a widely performed surgical procedure, with 6295 undertaken in England in 2018 alone. This procedure is associated with significant complications; incisional hernias are the most severe, occurring in 30% of patients. Complications place considerable financial burden on t...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9602752/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36294132 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192013553 |
_version_ | 1784817394747703296 |
---|---|
author | Sheikh, Yusuf Asunramu, Hareef Low, Heather Gakhar, Dev Muthukumar, Keerthi Yassin, Husam de Preux, Laure |
author_facet | Sheikh, Yusuf Asunramu, Hareef Low, Heather Gakhar, Dev Muthukumar, Keerthi Yassin, Husam de Preux, Laure |
author_sort | Sheikh, Yusuf |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: Stoma closure is a widely performed surgical procedure, with 6295 undertaken in England in 2018 alone. This procedure is associated with significant complications; incisional hernias are the most severe, occurring in 30% of patients. Complications place considerable financial burden on the NHS; hernia costs are estimated at GBP 114 million annually. As recent evidence (ROCSS, 2020) found that prophylactic meshes significantly reduce rates of incisional hernias following stoma closure surgery, an evaluation of this intervention vs. standard procedure is essential. Methods: A cost-utility analysis (CUA) was conducted using data from the ROCSS prospective multi-centre trial, which followed 790 patients, randomly assigned to mesh closure (n = 394) and standard closure (n = 396). Quality of life was assessed using mean EQ-5D-3L scores from the trial, and costs in GBP using UK-based sources over a 2-year time horizon. Results: The CUA yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of GBP 128,356.25 per QALY. Additionally, three univariate sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the model. Conclusion: The results demonstrate an increased benefit with mesh prophylaxis, but at an increased cost. Although the intervention is cost-ineffective and greater than the ICER threshold of GBP 30,000/QALY (NICE), further investigation into mesh prophylaxis for at risk population groups is needed. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9602752 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96027522022-10-27 A Cost-Utility Analysis of Mesh Prophylaxis in the Prevention of Incisional Hernias following Stoma Closure Surgery Sheikh, Yusuf Asunramu, Hareef Low, Heather Gakhar, Dev Muthukumar, Keerthi Yassin, Husam de Preux, Laure Int J Environ Res Public Health Article Background: Stoma closure is a widely performed surgical procedure, with 6295 undertaken in England in 2018 alone. This procedure is associated with significant complications; incisional hernias are the most severe, occurring in 30% of patients. Complications place considerable financial burden on the NHS; hernia costs are estimated at GBP 114 million annually. As recent evidence (ROCSS, 2020) found that prophylactic meshes significantly reduce rates of incisional hernias following stoma closure surgery, an evaluation of this intervention vs. standard procedure is essential. Methods: A cost-utility analysis (CUA) was conducted using data from the ROCSS prospective multi-centre trial, which followed 790 patients, randomly assigned to mesh closure (n = 394) and standard closure (n = 396). Quality of life was assessed using mean EQ-5D-3L scores from the trial, and costs in GBP using UK-based sources over a 2-year time horizon. Results: The CUA yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of GBP 128,356.25 per QALY. Additionally, three univariate sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the model. Conclusion: The results demonstrate an increased benefit with mesh prophylaxis, but at an increased cost. Although the intervention is cost-ineffective and greater than the ICER threshold of GBP 30,000/QALY (NICE), further investigation into mesh prophylaxis for at risk population groups is needed. MDPI 2022-10-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9602752/ /pubmed/36294132 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192013553 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Sheikh, Yusuf Asunramu, Hareef Low, Heather Gakhar, Dev Muthukumar, Keerthi Yassin, Husam de Preux, Laure A Cost-Utility Analysis of Mesh Prophylaxis in the Prevention of Incisional Hernias following Stoma Closure Surgery |
title | A Cost-Utility Analysis of Mesh Prophylaxis in the Prevention of Incisional Hernias following Stoma Closure Surgery |
title_full | A Cost-Utility Analysis of Mesh Prophylaxis in the Prevention of Incisional Hernias following Stoma Closure Surgery |
title_fullStr | A Cost-Utility Analysis of Mesh Prophylaxis in the Prevention of Incisional Hernias following Stoma Closure Surgery |
title_full_unstemmed | A Cost-Utility Analysis of Mesh Prophylaxis in the Prevention of Incisional Hernias following Stoma Closure Surgery |
title_short | A Cost-Utility Analysis of Mesh Prophylaxis in the Prevention of Incisional Hernias following Stoma Closure Surgery |
title_sort | cost-utility analysis of mesh prophylaxis in the prevention of incisional hernias following stoma closure surgery |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9602752/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36294132 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192013553 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sheikhyusuf acostutilityanalysisofmeshprophylaxisinthepreventionofincisionalherniasfollowingstomaclosuresurgery AT asunramuhareef acostutilityanalysisofmeshprophylaxisinthepreventionofincisionalherniasfollowingstomaclosuresurgery AT lowheather acostutilityanalysisofmeshprophylaxisinthepreventionofincisionalherniasfollowingstomaclosuresurgery AT gakhardev acostutilityanalysisofmeshprophylaxisinthepreventionofincisionalherniasfollowingstomaclosuresurgery AT muthukumarkeerthi acostutilityanalysisofmeshprophylaxisinthepreventionofincisionalherniasfollowingstomaclosuresurgery AT yassinhusam acostutilityanalysisofmeshprophylaxisinthepreventionofincisionalherniasfollowingstomaclosuresurgery AT depreuxlaure acostutilityanalysisofmeshprophylaxisinthepreventionofincisionalherniasfollowingstomaclosuresurgery AT sheikhyusuf costutilityanalysisofmeshprophylaxisinthepreventionofincisionalherniasfollowingstomaclosuresurgery AT asunramuhareef costutilityanalysisofmeshprophylaxisinthepreventionofincisionalherniasfollowingstomaclosuresurgery AT lowheather costutilityanalysisofmeshprophylaxisinthepreventionofincisionalherniasfollowingstomaclosuresurgery AT gakhardev costutilityanalysisofmeshprophylaxisinthepreventionofincisionalherniasfollowingstomaclosuresurgery AT muthukumarkeerthi costutilityanalysisofmeshprophylaxisinthepreventionofincisionalherniasfollowingstomaclosuresurgery AT yassinhusam costutilityanalysisofmeshprophylaxisinthepreventionofincisionalherniasfollowingstomaclosuresurgery AT depreuxlaure costutilityanalysisofmeshprophylaxisinthepreventionofincisionalherniasfollowingstomaclosuresurgery |