Michael G Fehlings1, Anick Nater, Haley Holmer. 1. *Division of Neurosurgery and Spinal Program, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; and †Spectrum Research, Tacoma, WA.
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVE: To perform an evidence-based synthesis of the literature to examine the cost-effectiveness of surgery in the management of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Between 2.5% and 10% of patients with cancer develop symptomatic MESCC, which leads to significant morbidity, and a reduction in quality and length of life. Although surgery is being increasingly used in the management of MESCC, it is unclear whether this modality is cost-effective, given the relatively limited lifespan of these patients. METHODS: Numerous databases were searched to identify full economic studies based on key questions established a priori. Only economic studies that evaluated and synthesized the costs and consequences (i.e., cost-minimization, cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness, or cost-utility) were considered for inclusion. Two independent reviewers examined the full text of the articles meeting inclusion criteria to obtain the final cohort of included studies. The Quality of Health Economic Studies instrument was scored by 2 independent reviewers. RESULTS: The search strategy yielded 38 potentially relevant citations, 2 of which met the inclusion criteria. One was a cost-utility study and the other was a cost-effectiveness study, and both used clinical data from the same randomized controlled trial. Both studies found surgery plus radiotherapy to be not only more expensive but also more effective than radiotherapy alone in the management of patients with MESCC. CONCLUSION: There is evidence from 2 high-quality studies that surgery plus radiotherapy is costlier but clinically more effective than radiotherapy alone for the management of MESCC. Of note, cost-effectiveness data for the role of spinal stabilization in the management of oncological spinal instability are lacking. This is a key knowledge gap that represents an opportunity for future research.
STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVE: To perform an evidence-based synthesis of the literature to examine the cost-effectiveness of surgery in the management of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Between 2.5% and 10% of patients with cancer develop symptomatic MESCC, which leads to significant morbidity, and a reduction in quality and length of life. Although surgery is being increasingly used in the management of MESCC, it is unclear whether this modality is cost-effective, given the relatively limited lifespan of these patients. METHODS: Numerous databases were searched to identify full economic studies based on key questions established a priori. Only economic studies that evaluated and synthesized the costs and consequences (i.e., cost-minimization, cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness, or cost-utility) were considered for inclusion. Two independent reviewers examined the full text of the articles meeting inclusion criteria to obtain the final cohort of included studies. The Quality of Health Economic Studies instrument was scored by 2 independent reviewers. RESULTS: The search strategy yielded 38 potentially relevant citations, 2 of which met the inclusion criteria. One was a cost-utility study and the other was a cost-effectiveness study, and both used clinical data from the same randomized controlled trial. Both studies found surgery plus radiotherapy to be not only more expensive but also more effective than radiotherapy alone in the management of patients with MESCC. CONCLUSION: There is evidence from 2 high-quality studies that surgery plus radiotherapy is costlier but clinically more effective than radiotherapy alone for the management of MESCC. Of note, cost-effectiveness data for the role of spinal stabilization in the management of oncological spinal instability are lacking. This is a key knowledge gap that represents an opportunity for future research.
Authors: Patrick D Kelly; Scott L Zuckerman; Yoshiya Yamada; Eric Lis; Mark H Bilsky; Ilya Laufer; Ori Barzilai Journal: Neurosurg Rev Date: 2019-06-01 Impact factor: 3.042
Authors: Julio C Furlan; Jefferson R Wilson; Eric M Massicotte; Arjun Sahgal; Michael G Fehlings Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2022-01-05 Impact factor: 13.029
Authors: Nicolas Dea; Anne L Versteeg; Arjun Sahgal; Jorrit-Jan Verlaan; Raphaële Charest-Morin; Laurence D Rhines; Daniel M Sciubba; James M Schuster; Michael H Weber; Aron Lazary; Michael G Fehlings; Michelle J Clarke; Paul M Arnold; Stefano Boriani; Chetan Bettegowda; Ilya Laufer; Ziya L Gokaslan; Charles G Fisher Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 4.654