Abstract
ObjectiveTo evaluate the decision of watchful waiting (WW) versus elective laparoscopic hernia repair (ELHR) for minimally symptomatic paraesophageal hernias (PEH) with respect to cost-effectiveness. BackgroundThe current recommendation for minimally symptomatic PEHs is watchful waiting. This standard is based on a decision analysis from 2002 that compared the two strategies on quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Since that time, the safety of ELHR has improved. A cost-effectiveness study for PEH repair has not been reported. MethodsA Markov decision model was developed to compare the strategies of WW and ELHR for minimally symptomatic PEH. Input variables were estimated from published studies. Cost data was obtained from Medicare. Outcomes for the two strategies were cost and QALY's. ResultsELHR was superior to the WW strategy in terms of quality of life, but it was more costly. The average cost for a patient in the ELHR arm was 11,771 dollars while for the WW arm it was 2207. ConclusionThis study shows that WW and ELHR both have benefits in the management of minimally symptomatic paraesophageal hernias.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
