Cost–utility analysis of operative versus non-operative treatment for colorectal liver metastases

Abstract

Abstract Background Surgical resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) is the standard of care when possible, although this strategy has not been compared with non-operative interventions in controlled trials. Although survival outcomes are clear, the cost-effectiveness of surgery is not. This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of resection for CRLMs compared with non-operative treatment (palliative care including chemotherapy). Methods Operative and non-operative cohorts were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Patients in the operative cohort had a minimum of 10 years of follow-up. A model-based cost–utility analysis was conducted to quantify the mean cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) over a lifetime time horizon. The analysis was conducted from a healthcare provider perspective (UK National Health Service) in a secondary care (hospital) setting. Results Median survival was 41 and 21 months in the operative and non-operative cohorts respectively (P < 0·001). The operative strategy dominated non-operative treatments, being less costly (€22 200 versus €32 800) and more effective (4·017 versus 1·111 QALYs gained). The results of extensive sensitivity analysis showed that the operative strategy dominated non-operative treatment in every scenario. Conclusion Operative treatment of CRLMs yields greater survival than non-operative treatment, and is both more effective and less costly.