Stapled hemorrhoidopexy, an innovative surgical procedure for hemorrhoidal prolapse: cost-utility analysis

AIM To undertake full economic evaluation of stapled hemorrhoidopexy (PPH) to establish its cost-effectiveness and investigate whether PPH can become cost-saving compared to conventional excisional hemorrhoidectomy (CH). METHODS A cost-utility analysis in hospital and health care system (UK) was undertaken using a probabilistic, cohort-based decision tree to compare the use of PPH with CH. Sensitivity analyses allowed showing outcomes in regard to the variations in clinical practice of PPH procedure. The participants were patients undergoing initial surgical treatment of third and fourth degree hemorrhoids within a 1-year time-horizon. Data on clinical effectiveness were obtained from a systematic review of the literature. Main outcome measures were the cost per procedure at the hospital level, total direct costs from the health care system perspective, quality adjusted life years (QALY) gained and incremental cost per QALY gained. RESULTS A decrease in operating theater time and hospital stay associated with PPH led to a cost saving compared to CH of GBP 27 (US $43.11, €30.50) per procedure at the hospital level and to an incremental cost of GBP 33 (US $52.68, €37.29) after one year from the societal perspective. Calculation of QALYs induced an incremental QALY of 0.0076 and showed an incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER) of GBP 4316 (US $6890.47, €4878.37). Taking into consideration recent literature on clinical outcomes, PPH becomes cost saving compared to CH for the health care system. CONCLUSIONS PPH is a cost-effective procedure with an ICER of GBP 4136 and it seems that an innovative surgical procedure could be cost saving in routine clinical practice.