Cost-effectivenessof endoscopic endonasal vs transcranial approaches for olfactory groove meningioma

Background Endoscopic endonasal approaches (EEAs) have been adopted as an alternative to standard transcranial approaches for olfactory groove meningiomas (OGMs). However, the relative cost-effectiveness remains controversial. Methods Cost-utility analysis from a societal perspective comparing EEA vs transcranial approaches for OGM was used in this study. Surgical treatment was modeled using decision analysis, and a Markov model was adopted over a 20-year horizon. Parameters were obtained from literature review. Costs were expressed in 2017 Canadian dollars. Results In the base case, EEA was cost-effective compared with transcranial surgery with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $33 523 ($30 475 USD)/QALY. There was a 55% likelihood that EEA was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay of $50 000/QALY. EEA remained cost-effective at a cerebrospinal fluid leak rate below 60%, gross total resection rate above 25%, and base cost less than $66 174 ($60 158 USD). Conclusion EEA may be a cost-effective alternative to transcranial approaches for selected OGM.

Automated summary

Cost-utility analysis comparing EEA and transcranial approaches for OGM showed that EEA may be a cost-effective alternative under specific conditions. This study provides insights into the relative cost-effectiveness of different surgical approaches for olfactory groove meningiomas.