Health economic evaluation of minimally invasive surgery in treatment of digestive tract cancers: a Meta-analysis
10.3760/cma.j.cn112338-20240530-00318
- VernacularTitle:微创手术治疗消化道癌的卫生经济学评价的Meta分析
- Author:
Xiaoyue YIN
1
;
Ning ZHOU
;
Xueli YANG
;
Zhuoyu SUN
;
Yinghui BAO
;
Shengshu WANG
;
Ke HAN
;
Jing LONG
;
Min ZHAO
;
Haowei LI
;
Rongrong LI
;
Shimin CHEN
;
Junhan YANG
;
Huaihao LI
;
Yueting SHI
;
Guoning ZHU
;
Jianhua WANG
;
Shanshan YANG
;
Boyan LI
;
Wenchang WANG
;
Shengyan DU
;
Yao HE
;
Enqiang LING-HU
;
Huikai LI
;
Miao LIU
;
Juan XIE
Author Information
1. 天津医科大学公共卫生学院，天津 300070
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Esophageal neoplasms;
Gastric neoplasms;
Colorectal neoplasms;
Minimally invasive surgery;
Health economic evaluation
- From:
Chinese Journal of Epidemiology
2025;46(1):154-165
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare minimally invasive surgery with traditional open surgery, analyze the current application status of health economic evaluations in the treatment of digestive tract cancers, such as esophageal cancer, gastric cancer, and colorectal cancer by minimally invasive surgery and provide evidence for the rational selection of clinical treatment, alleviation of disease-related economic burdens, and rational allocation of healthcare resources.Methods:By using five databases, i.e. China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang data, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, PubMed, and Embase, a database was established to retrieve all the papers about health economic studies of minimally invasive surgery for esophageal cancer, gastric cancer, and colorectal cancer published until December 31, 2023. Literature was analyzed by using software NoteExpress 3.8, and data were processed using Excel 2021. The quality of included papers was evaluated using the CHEERS 2022 checklist, and Meta-analysis was conducted by using software Stata 17.0.Results:A total of 10 919 relevant papers were retrieved, and 59 studies were included. Only 14 studies (23.7%) used standard health economic evaluation methods. Meta-analysis results revealed no significant differences in direct medical expenditure and total expenditure between minimally invasive surgery and open surgery. However, the expenditure for minimally invasive surgery exhibited a significant increase [mean difference ( MD)=5 973.12 yuan, P<0.001], while hospital stay and indirect expenditure significantly decreased ( MD: -4.85 days and -733.79 yuan, P<0.001). In China, for gastric cancer, the direct medical expenditure of endoscopic surgery was lower than that of open surgery ( MD=-33 000.00 yuan) with no significant difference ( P<0.001). In colorectal cancer cases, the direct medical and surgical expenditures for laparoscopic surgery were higher than those for open surgery ( MD: 4 277.94 yuan and 4 267.80 yuan, P<0.001), while the indirect and total medical expenditures decreased ( MD: -768.34 yuan and -159.10 yuan). Hospital stays in patients who had minimally invasive surgery for all three types of cancer were shorter than those who had open surgery ( P<0.001). Conclusions:In the treatment of gastrointestinal cancer, compared with open surgery, minimally invasive surgery shows higher expenditure, but has advantages, such as shorter hospital stay and lower indirect expenditure, and there were no significant differences in direct medical and total expenditures between the two approaches. When conducting health economic evaluation, factors such as postoperative complications, hospital stay, and patient's economic status should be considered for their impact on total medical expenditure. It is necessary to pay attention to the application of health economic evaluations in healthcare decision-making.
