Financial Burden of Liver Transplant vs Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.


Journal

Transplantation proceedings
ISSN: 1873-2623
Titre abrégé: Transplant Proc
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0243532

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Historique:
received: 15 04 2019
accepted: 22 04 2019
entrez: 11 8 2019
pubmed: 11 8 2019
medline: 4 12 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Liver transplant and liver resection are surgical treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) performed with curative intent. While liver transplant provides longer survival when compared to resection, the financial burden on patients and payors is significantly greater. With the increase in health care costs and the emergence of high deductible insurance policies that increase out of pocket deductibles for patients, assessment of value-based treatment is warranted. We compiled total billable events from diagnosis of HCC through resection (N = 20) or transplant (N = 24) to death or last reported encounter from January 2011 to December 2012. Patients with HCC receiving resection had a model of end stage liver disease of 10.2 ± 1.2, survival 652 days (3-1, 167 days), and billable encounters of $316,873 ($2904/day). HCC patients receiving a liver transplant had a greater liver injury (model of end stage liver disease of 19.2 ± 3.7), longer survival (1579 days), and higher billable encounters, $740,714 ($2889/day). The surgical procedure represented the largest cost category (28% and 26% resection vs transplant, respectively). The cost effectiveness of treatment was directly proportional to length of survival. In resection, patients who survived >30 days (85%) cost per day dropped to $432. Transplant patients who survived >2 years (75%) saw the cost per day drop to $462. The relative financial burdens of liver resection vs liver transplant for treating HCC are comparable in patients who survive beyond a certain threshold. Transplant patients survived longer, and survival beyond 2 years makes this approach cost effective. In a health care climate aiming to contain costs and evaluate value-based treatment paradigms, expected survival and financial burden should be included in the treatment decision analysis.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Liver transplant and liver resection are surgical treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) performed with curative intent. While liver transplant provides longer survival when compared to resection, the financial burden on patients and payors is significantly greater. With the increase in health care costs and the emergence of high deductible insurance policies that increase out of pocket deductibles for patients, assessment of value-based treatment is warranted.
METHODS METHODS
We compiled total billable events from diagnosis of HCC through resection (N = 20) or transplant (N = 24) to death or last reported encounter from January 2011 to December 2012.
RESULTS RESULTS
Patients with HCC receiving resection had a model of end stage liver disease of 10.2 ± 1.2, survival 652 days (3-1, 167 days), and billable encounters of $316,873 ($2904/day). HCC patients receiving a liver transplant had a greater liver injury (model of end stage liver disease of 19.2 ± 3.7), longer survival (1579 days), and higher billable encounters, $740,714 ($2889/day). The surgical procedure represented the largest cost category (28% and 26% resection vs transplant, respectively). The cost effectiveness of treatment was directly proportional to length of survival. In resection, patients who survived >30 days (85%) cost per day dropped to $432. Transplant patients who survived >2 years (75%) saw the cost per day drop to $462.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
The relative financial burdens of liver resection vs liver transplant for treating HCC are comparable in patients who survive beyond a certain threshold. Transplant patients survived longer, and survival beyond 2 years makes this approach cost effective. In a health care climate aiming to contain costs and evaluate value-based treatment paradigms, expected survival and financial burden should be included in the treatment decision analysis.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31399174
pii: S0041-1345(19)30631-1
doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2019.04.026
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1907-1912

Commentaires et corrections

Type : ErratumIn

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Nicholas J Skill (NJ)

Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana. Electronic address: nskill@iupui.edu.

James Butler (J)

Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.

Daniel C O'Brien (DC)

Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.

Joshua K Kays (JK)

Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.

Chandrasekhar Avinash Kubal (CA)

Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.

Suthat Liangpunsakul (S)

Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.

Nehal Ninad (N)

Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.

Mary A Maluccio (MA)

Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH