Cost-effectiveness analysis of infected necrotizing pancreatitis management in an academic setting.

Background and Aims: Traditional management for infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) often utilizes open necrosectomy, which carries high morbidity and complication rates. Thus, minimally invasive strategies have gained favor, specifically step-up approaches utilizing endoscopic or minimally-invasive surgery (MIS); however, the ideal management modality for INP has not been identified.
Methods: A decision tree model was designed to analyze costs and survival associated with open necrosectomy, endoscopic step-up, and MIS step-up protocols for management of INP after 4 weeks of necrosis development with adequate retroperitoneal access. Costs were based on a third-party payer perspective using Medicare reimbursement rates. The model's effectiveness was represented by quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Sensitivity analyses were performed to validate results.
Results: Endoscopic step-up was the dominant economic strategy with 7.92 QALYs for $90,864.09. Surgical step-up resulted in a decrease of 0.09 QALYs and a cost increase of $10,067.89 while open necrosectomy resulted in a decrease of 0.4 QALYs and an increased cost of $18,407.52 over endoscopic step-up. In 100,000 random-sampling simulations, 65.5% of simulations favored endoscopic step-up. MIS step-up was favored when MIS acute mortality rates fell and when MIS drainage success rates rose.
Conclusions: In our simulated patients with INP, the most cost-effective management strategy is endoscopic step-up. Cost-effectiveness varies with changes in acute mortality and drainage success, which will depend on local expertise.
Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Vishnu Prasath, Dr. Patrick L. Quinn, Dr. Joseph B. Oliver, Simran Arjani, Dr. Sushil K. Ahlawat, and Dr. Ravi J. Chokshi have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
(Copyright © 2021 IAP and EPC. All rights reserved.)