An economic evaluation of perioperative enteral nutrition in patients undergoing colorectal surgery (SANICS II study).

AIMS

The objective of this (trial based) economic evaluation was to assess, from a societal perspective, the cost-effectiveness of perioperative enteral nutrition compared with standard care in patients undergoing colorectal surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Alongside the SANICS II randomized controlled trial, global quality-of-life, utilities (measured by EQ-5D-5L), healthcare costs, production losses, and patient and family costs were assessed at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) (i.e. cost per increased global quality-of-life score or quality-adjusted life year [QALY] gained) and cost effectiveness acceptability curves were visualized.

RESULTS

In total, 265 patients were included in the original trial (n = 132 in the perioperative enteral nutrition group and n = 133 in the standard care group). At 6 months, global quality-of-life (83 vs 83, p = .357) did not differ significantly between the groups. The mean total societal costs for the intervention and standard care groups were €14,673 and €11,974, respectively, but did not reach statistical significance (p = .109). The intervention resulted in an ICER of -€6,276 per point increase in the global quality of life score. The gain in QALY was marginal (0.003), with an additional cost of €2,941, and the ICUR (Incremental cost utility ratio) was estimated at €980,333.

LIMITATIONS

The cost elements for all the participating centers reflect the reference prices from the Netherlands. Patient-reported questionnaires may have resulted in recall bias. Sample size was limited by exclusion of patients who did not complete questionnaires for at least at two time points. A power analysis based on costs and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) was not performed. The economic impact could not be analyzed at 1 month post-operatively where the effects could potentially be higher.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that perioperative nutrition is not beneficial for the patients in terms of quality-of-life and is not cost-effective.