Cost-effectiveness comparisons of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) vs. non-ERAS for esophageal cancer in China: a retrospective comparative cohort study.

Background: Esophageal cancer is a malignant tumor that seriously endangers human health. Compared with surgery alone, enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has been widely used in clinical practice because it can improve perioperative care, minimize complications, and accelerate the recovery of esophageal cancer patients. However, there is a lack of data supporting the cost-effectiveness of ERAS.
Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 968 esophageal cancer patients according to the pre-determined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Based on the Chinese expert consensus and guidelines, we improved the ERAS protocols consisting of 17 core measures. Subjects receiving >60% of the ERAS optimization measures were classified as the ERAS group, while those receiving <60% were classified as the pre-ERAS group. The demographic information, clinical and cost data of these patients were collected from the medical records. Based on the data distribution, the clinical effects and costs between the two groups were examined using the independent-sample t -test, the rank sum test, or the chi-square test. The effect of cost-effectiveness ratio calculation was measured by the disease cure rate obtained from the discharge report.
Results: A total of 374 and 594 patients were included in the ERAS and pre-ERAS groups, respectively, and there were no significant differences in gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, tumor location, tumor stage, and other basic conditions between the two groups. The intraoperative blood loss, hospital stays, postoperative rehabilitation time, postoperative complications, and the number of secondary admissions within 30 days postoperatively of the ERAS group were lower than those of the pre-ERAS group (P<0.05). Compared with the pre-ERAS group, participants in the ERAS group had lower direct medical cost, direct non-medical cost, and indirect cost (P<0.05). Moreover, the cost-effectiveness ratio of the ERAS group (118,439.0 Yuan) was lower than that of the pre-ERAS group (143,369.0 Yuan) with respect to the cure rate.
Conclusions: The study demonstrated that compared with pre-ERAS, the application of ERAS in esophageal cancer patients may accelerate postoperative rehabilitation, reduce the length of hospital stays and postoperative complications, and have better cost-effectiveness, highlighting the potential of ERAS to improve the quality of medical care.
Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://atm.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/atm-22-4169/coif). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
(2022 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.)