Objectives/hypothesis: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an endoscopic versus microscopic approach to pituitary adenoma resection.
Study design: Markov decision tree economic evaluation.
Methods: An economic evaluation using a Markov decision tree model was performed. The economic perspective was that of the healthcare third-party payer. Effectiveness and probability data were obtained from a single meta-analysis of 38 studies. Costs were obtained from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project database and wholesale pharmaceutical pricing. Multiple sensitivity analyses were performed including a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Comparative treatment groups were: 1) endoscopic approach and 2) microscopic approach to pituitary adenoma resection. The primary outcome was cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The time horizon was 25 years, and costs were discounted at a rate of 3.5%.
Results: The endoscopic approach cost a total of $17,244.63 and produced a total of 24.30 QALYs. The microscopic approach cost a total of $23,756.60 and produced a total of 24.20 QALYs. In the reference case, the endoscopic approach was a dominant intervention (both less costly and more effective); therefore, an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was not calculated. The sensitivity analysis demonstrated 79% certainty that the endoscopic approach is the cost-effective decision, at a willingness to pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY.
Conclusions: This economic evaluation suggests that the endoscopic approach is the more cost-effective intervention compared to the microscopic approach for patients requiring a pituitary adenoma resection.
Keywords: Pituitary adenoma; cost utility analysis; cost-effectiveness analysis; economic evaluation; endoscopic; hypophysectomy; microscopic.
© 2014 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.