Adoption of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol Increases Cost of Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy and Does not Improve Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have been shown to reduce length of stay (LOS) and complications. The impact of ERAS protocols on the cost of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) has not been studied. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC from 2016-2022 at a single quaternary center. Propensity score matching was used to create pre-and post-ERAS cohorts. Cost, overall and serious complications, and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) between the two cohorts were compared using the Mann-Whitney U-test for continuous variables and χ2 test for categorical variables. RESULTS: Our final matched cohort consisted of 100 patients, with 50 patients in both the pre- and post-ERAS groups. After adjusting for patient complexity and inflation, the median total cost [$75,932 ($67,166-102,645) versus $92,992 ($80,720-116,710), p = 0.02] and operating room cost [$26,817 ($23,378-33,121) versus $34,434 ($28,085-$41,379), p < 0.001] were significantly higher in the post-ERAS cohort. Overall morbidity (n = 22, 44% versus n = 17, 34%, p = 0.40) and ICU length of stay [2 days (IQR 1-3) versus 2 days (IQR 1-4), p = 0.70] were similar between the two cohorts. A total cost increase of $22,393 [SE $13,047, 95% CI (-$3178 to $47,965), p = 0.086] was estimated after implementation of ERAS, with operating room cost significantly contributing to this increase [$8419, SE $1628, 95% CI ($5228-11,609), p < 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: CRS-HIPEC ERAS protocols were associated with higher total costs due to increased operating room costs at a single institution. There was no significant difference in ICU LOS and complications after the implementation of the ERAS protocol.

Impact of extent of disease on 1-year healthcare costs in patients who undergo cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for colorectal peritoneal metastases: retrospective observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this retrospective observational study was to determine the impact of the extent of peritoneal disease on 1-year healthcare costs in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM) who undergo cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS + HIPEC). The extent of peritoneal disease, expressed by the Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI), directly affects the complexity of CRS + HIPEC and ultimately survival outcomes. The impact of the PCI on treatment-related healthcare costs remains unknown. METHODS: Data from patients with colorectal PM who underwent CRS + HIPEC between January 2012 and November 2017 were extracted retrospectively from an institutional database. Patients were divided into four subgroups with PCI scores ranging from 0 to 20. Treatment-related costs up to 1 year after CRS + HIPEC were obtained from the financial department. Differences in costs and survival outcomes were compared using the χ2 test and Kruskal-Wallis H test. RESULTS: Seventy-three patients were included (PCI 0-5, 22 patients; PCI 6-10, 19 patients; PCI 11-15, 17 patients; PCI 16-20, 15 patients). Median (i.q.r.) costs were significantly increased for the PCI 11-15 and PCI 16-20 groups (€51 029 (42 500-58 575) and €46 548 (35 194-60 533) respectively) compared with those for the PCI 0-5 and PCI 6-10 groups (€33 856 (25 293-42 235) and €39 013 (30 519-51 334) respectively) (P = 0·009). CONCLUSION: Treatment-related healthcare costs are significantly increased among patients with extensive tumour burden (PCI score 10 or above) who undergo CRS + HIPEC for the treatment of colorectal PM.

ANTECEDENTES: El objetivo de este estudio observacional retrospectivo fue determinar el impacto de la extensión de la enfermedad peritoneal sobre los costes de atención médica al año en pacientes con metástasis peritoneales (peritoneal metastases, PM) de origen colorrectal que se someten a cirugía citorreductora con quimioterapia intraperitoneal hipertérmica (cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, CRS + HIPEC). La extensión de la enfermedad peritoneal, expresada por el índice de carcinomatosis peritoneal (peritoneal cancer index, PCI), afecta directamente a la complejidad de la CRS + HIPEC y, en última instancia, a los resultados de supervivencia. El impacto de la PCI en los costes de la atención médica relacionados con el tratamiento sigue siendo desconocido. MÉTODOS: Los datos de pacientes con PM de origen colorrectal que se sometieron a CRS + HIPEC entre enero de 2012 y noviembre de 2017 se extrajeron retrospectivamente de una base de datos institucional. Los pacientes se dividieron en cuatro subgrupos con PCI que variaron de 0 a 20. Los costes relacionados con el tratamiento hasta un año después de la CRS + HIPEC se obtuvieron del departamento financiero. Las diferencias en los costes y los resultados de supervivencia se compararon mediante los tests χ2 y de Kruskal-Wallis H. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 73 pacientes (PCI 0-5, 22 pacientes; PCI 6-10, 19 pacientes; PCI 11-15, 17 pacientes y PCI 16-20, 15 pacientes). Los costes medios aumentaron significativamente para los grupos PCI 11−15 y PCI 16−20 (51.029€ (rango intercuartílico, RIQ) 42.500€−58575€)) y 46.548€ (RIQ 35.194€-60.533€), respectivamente)) en comparación con los de los grupos PCI 0−5 y PCI 6-10 (33.856€ (RIQ 25.293€−42.23€) y 39.013€ (RIQ 30.519€-51.334€), respectivamente, P = 0,009). CONCLUSIÓN: Los costes de la atención médica relacionados con el tratamiento aumentan significativamente entre los pacientes con una carga tumoral extensa (es decir, PCI ≥ 10) que se someten a CRS + HIPEC para el tratamiento de PM de origen colorrectal.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC Compared With Systemic Chemotherapy in Isolated Peritoneal Carcinomatosis From Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cost-effectiveness evaluations of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) from metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in the United States are lacking. METHODS: The authors developed a Markov model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CRS/HIPEC compared with systemic chemotherapy for isolated PC from mCRC from a societal perspective in the United States. The systemic treatment regimens consisted of FOLFOX, FOLFIRI, bevacizumab, cetuximab, and pantitumumab. The model inputs including costs, probabilities, survival, progression, and utilities were taken from the literature. The cycle length for the model was 2 weeks, and the time horizon was 7 years. A discount rate of 3% was applied. The model was tested for internal and external validation, and robustness was established with univariate sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA). The primary outcomes were total costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life-years (LYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). A willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000 per QALY was assumed. RESULTS: The ICER for treatment with CRS/HIPEC compared with systemic chemotherapy was $91,034 per QALY gained ($74,098 per LY gained). The univariate sensitivity analysis showed that the total costs for treatment with CRS/HIPEC had the largest effect on the calculated ICER. The CRS/HIPEC treatment was a cost-effective strategy during the majority of simulations in the PSA. The average ICER for 100,000 simulations in the PSA was $70,807 per QALY gained. The likelihood of CRS/HIPEC being a cost-effective strategy at the WTP threshold was 87%. CONCLUSIONS: The CRS/HIPEC procedure is a cost-effective treatment for isolated PC from mCRC in the United States.

Cost Effectiveness of Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Management of Colorectal Peritoneal Carcinomatosis.

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal cancer is a stage 4 disease for which palliative chemotherapy has traditionally been considered the mainstay of treatment. Since the development of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) by Sugarbaker, this combined method treatment has resulted in improved survival outcomes with acceptable morbidity for selected patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. This study examined the cost effectiveness of CRS and HIPEC compared with palliative chemotherapy for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal cancer within the context of the Singaporean health care system. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from histologically proven colorectal cancer treated at the National Cancer Centre Singapore (NCCS) was conducted. RESULTS: The average cost of CRS and HIPEC per patient was S$83,680.26, and the median overall survival period was 47 months. The calculated cost per life year attained for a patient who underwent CRS and HIPEC was S$21,365.19 per life year. In comparison, the average cost of palliative chemotherapy was S$44,478.87, with a median overall survival of 9 months, and the calculated cost per life year attained for a patient in this treatment group was S$59,305.16 per life year. CONCLUSION: The findings show that CRS and HIPEC results in prolonged survival for selected patients with colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis and a lower cost per life year attained than for the traditionally used palliative chemotherapy. It should logically be the preferred treatment of choice for selected patients with colorectal peritoneal metastasis.

Evaluation of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in a community setting: A cost-utility analysis of a hospital's initial experience and reflections on the health care system.

BACKGROUND: The combination of Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) plus Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been gaining a considerable interest by surgeons throughout the United States due to the significant survival improvement it provides for peritoneal surface malignancies and the ability to reproduce comparable clinical results in numerous health care centers. However, CRS plus HIPEC has not been sufficiently investigated from the economic standpoint in the United States where a wide variety of health care insurers exists. This study was conducted to analyze hospital/surgeon cost and reimbursement data at a community hospital offering a new peritoneal surface malignancy program, and expand the discussion to analyze future healthcare implementation on this procedure in the United States. METHODS: This is a retrospective economic analysis of an initial CRS plus HIPEC experience at a community non-teaching medical center. This study was conducted using hospital/surgeon cost and reimbursement based on the Office of Finance data at Edward Hospital Cancer Center (Naperville, IL). All patients who underwent CRS and HIPEC between June 2013 and August 2014 were included in this analysis. We aimed to assess CRS plus HIPEC purely from the financial perspective on the initial admission regardless of the patients' advancement of the disease or postoperative adverse events. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients underwent 26 CRS plus HIPEC procedures. Twelve patients had private insurance plans (PRV) whereas 13 were covered by public insurers (PUB). Median overall length of stay (LOS) was 10 days (PRV 10 days vs. PUB 11 days; P = 0.76.) Average hospital cost was $38,369 (PRV $37,093 vs. PUB $39,463; P = 0.67), and average reimbursement for our patient population was $45,243 (PRV $48,954 vs. PUB $42,062; P = 0.53). It was noted that CRS plus HIPEC generated more net profit in patients with private insurance than in those with public plans, however, not statistically significant ($11,861 vs. $2,599 per patient, respectively; P = 0.38). Evaluating surgeon's data, average surgeon's charge was $29,139 (PRV $28,440 vs. PUB $29,737; P = 0.80), and average patients' payment was $8,126 (PRV 9,234 vs. PUB 7,176; P = 0.47). CONCLUSION: CRS plus HIPEC is profitable in the community setting for both the hospital and surgeon. Both private and public insurers reimbursed profitably, though with a greater profit margin from private insurers. As CRS plus HIPEC is becoming more widely recognized as a standard of care for patients with peritoneal surface malignancy, it is increasingly important to understand and report its associated costs and variability in insurance coverage, especially in light of the current healthcare structure changes in the United States. It is strongly encouraged to report and present a wider scope of CRS plus HIPEC economic experiences in a variety of hospital settings to provide further evidence for future healthcare implementations in the United States. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;113:544-547. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Use Patterns and Costs of Isolated Limb Perfusion and Infusion in the Treatment of Regional Metastatic Melanoma: A Retrospective Database Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Isolated limb perfusion and infusion (ILP/ILI) are therapies for regional metastatic melanoma that allow high doses of anticancer drugs to be delivered directly into the circulation of an affected limb, thereby minimizing systemic drug toxicity. This procedure can lead to high response rates and is recommended in patients with Stage III unresectable metastatic melanoma. However, limited information is available on patterns of use and costs. This study examined patterns of ILP/ILI use and associated costs in patients with melanoma in the United States (US). METHODS: Retrospective, observational study, using administrative claims data from the MarketScan(®) databases, was performed in patients with a diagnosis of melanoma (ICD-9-CM: 172.xx, V10.82) who underwent ILP/ILI (CPT-4: 36823) between January 1, 2002 and March 31, 2013. Patient characteristics, use patterns, length of hospital stay, and costs (per 2014 US $) of ILP/ILI were assessed. RESULTS: One hundred and thirteen patients met the study criteria and were included in the analysis. Mean age was 61.4 years (standard deviation [SD] 13.8) and 38.9% of patients were male; the mean baseline Charlson Comorbidity Index was 0.19; 34.5% of patients were Medicare beneficiaries. The majority of patients (87.6%) had melanoma of the lower limb, 11.5% of the upper limb, and 0.9% of both limbs; 60.2% had lymph node metastasis and 56.6% had skin metastasis. Four patients (3.5%) underwent multiple ILP/ILI. The mean (± SD) length of hospital stay was 5.6 (± 3.5) days and the mean (± SD) cost was US$36,758 (± 27,124) per ILP/ILI procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Isolated limb perfusion and infusion in patients with melanoma were associated with long hospital stays and high costs. These results provide useful source data for the economic evaluation of treatment options for regional metastatic melanoma. FUNDING: This study was funded by Amgen, Inc.

[Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the German DRG system. Analysis of case cost calculations of a maximum care university]. / Hypertherme intraperitoneale Chemotherapie im G-DRG-System. Analyse der Fallkostenkalkulationen eines universitären Maximalversorgers.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) offers patients with peritoneal cancer of various origins the chance of a relevant increase in life expectancy. These cases are very complex from a medical viewpoint and very expensive from an economical aspect. An analysis of case cost calculations was performed to find out whether this procedure can on average be carried out cost-effectively by a maximum care university. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All cases from 2008 in which HIPEC was carried out were analyzed. The types of main diagnosis, secondary diagnoses, procedures, times from incision to suture and hospital stay were analyzed. On the basis of the case costs the proceeds and marginal returns were calculated from the diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) and additional remuneration when applicable. The causes of positive and negative marginal returns were explained using the InEK cost matrix. RESULTS: In 18 patients there were 9 different main diagnoses and 7 different "main procedures" (from a surgical perspective the most resource intensive procedures) and a total of 10 different DRGs were identified in the grouping algorithm. With an average of 2 operations (range 1-7) per patient the summed incision-to-suture time was 423 min (170-962 min). The patients stayed on average 6.4 days (1.3-17.6 days) in intensive care. The average case cost was 21,072€ (range 8,657-55,904€) and the proceeds 20,474€ (6,333-37,497€). Each case had on average a debit balance of 598€ (range from 11,843€ profit balance to 18,407€ debit balance) with an assumed base rate of 2,786€. The causes for positive or negative marginal profits were mostly operating times, incision-to-suture times and duration of intensive care. CONCLUSIONS: The proceeds showed on average a deficit of only 3% compared to the costs. The operating times must be decreased by optimization particularly of the preoperative approach. Interventions should be carried out in one stage only and the intraoperative connecting and waiting times should be reduced in order to reduce the incision-to-suture times.

Evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (peritonectomy) at the St George Hospital peritoneal surface malignancy program.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are treatment approaches for peritoneal carcinomatosis that has demonstrated improved survival outcomes with acceptable complication rates. This report aims to measure and describe the survival outcomes and health care cost associated with CRS and HIPEC for peritoneal surface malignancies at a centralized tertiary institution in Australia. METHODS: The expenditure of treatment for 136 consecutive patients who underwent 159 CRS and HIPEC from June 2002 to June 2008 were obtained. Together with their survival outcomes from treatment, a cost-effectiveness analysis was performed. RESULTS: The average cost of CRS and HIPEC per patient and per life year for appendix cancer is AUD $88,423 (range, AUD $23,933-AUD $299,145) and AUD $37,737/LY; for colorectal cancer is AUD $66,148 (range, AUD $26,079-AUD $409,666) and AUD $29,757/LY; for pseudomyxoma peritonei is AUD $92,308 (range, AUD $11,562-AUD $501,144) and AUD $29,559/LY; for peritoneal mesothelioma is AUD $55,062 (range, AUD $23,261-AUD $94,104) and AUD $20,521/LY; and for other peritoneal surface malignancies is AUD $44,668 (range, AUD $31,592-AUD $70,026) and AUD $22,091/LY. CONCLUSIONS: This complex surgical treatment results in significant increases in medical costs with a parallel increase in survival for a disease that has been poorly treated, and hence may be considered as cost-effective given the observed life years gained.

Lucy Wortham James lecture. Regional perfusion. Current sophistication, what next?

A review of the development of regional chemotherapy by perfusion is presented. Techniques have been developed for most regions of the body. Early response rates ranged from 48% for glioblastoma and 55% with carcinoma to 67% with soft tissue sarcoma and 84% with melanoma. By 1984, 1325 patients had been perfused 1509 times. The best responses have occurred with melanoma and soft tissue sarcoma of the limbs. Thus, at 10 years, the cumulative overall survival for Stage I melanoma of the limbs, combining regional perfusion and conservative excisional surgery, was 77%. The best results occurred in female patients with upper-limb disease (83%), and the poorest results were in male patients with lower-limb disease (53%). The overall 10-year survival for regional melanoma was 41%, ranging from 23% for in-transit metastases to 51% for patients with positive regional nodes treated by perfusion and regional lymph node dissection. The 10-year survival for perfusion and limb-sparing excision for soft tissue sarcoma was 65%. Advantages and complications are presented and discussed. Questions and plans for the future are reviewed.