2017 - CIRTA

9- Intestinal Failure

48.1 - Intestinal Transplantation is Less Expensive Compared to Long-Term Home Parenteral Nutrition in Adults

Presenter: Emilio, Canovai, Leuven, Belgium
Authors: Emilio Canovai, Laurens Ceulemans, Guido Peers, Lutgard Le Pourcq, Marleen Pijpops, Marguerite Stas, Gert De Hertogh, Martin Hiele, Tim Vanuytsel, Jacques Pirenne

Intestinal Transplantation is Less Expensive Compared to Long-Term Home Parenteral Nutrition in Adults

Emilio Canovai1, Laurens Ceulemans1, Guido Peers2, Lutgard Le Pourcq3, Marleen Pijpops3, Marguerite Stas4, Gert De Hertogh1, Martin Hiele1, Tim Vanuytsel1, Jacques Pirenne1.

1Leuven Intestinal Failure and Transplantation Center (LIFT), University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; 2Financial Department, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; 3Pharmacy Department, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; 4Oncological Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

Introduction: The primary treatment of intestinal failure is home parenteral nutrition (HPN) while intestinal transplantation (ITx) is reserved for those cases where severe complications occur. In renal failure, transplantation has been promoted over dialysis because transplantation reduces the costs. It is unknown whether ITx is cost effective in the treatment of chronic intestinal failure.

Aim: To compare the costs of uncomplicated HPN patients to a cohort of ITx patients at our institution.

Methods: First, we collected the cost data from our adult cohort of stable, long-term (>2 years) HPN patients. We included all patients with minimum of 5 years follow-up. The first two years after start of HPN were excluded in order to identify the actual cost of stable intestinal failure patients. Second, we analyzed our cohort of ITx patients, transplanted between 1/1/2000 and 31/12/2015. We collected all costs from day 1 until 5 years post-transplant. Next, we compared the costs between stable HPN patients and ITx in these 5 years-period. All costs were rounded to the nearest euro and corrected for inflation to 2015.

Results: There were 28 HPN patients in this cohort, (14 females, mean age 58.6 years). Median duration of HPN was 8.6 years (5.1-12.0). HPN was administered 4.1 days per week (range: 1.5-7) at 5767 total kcal (2385-10890). Indications were short bowel syndrome (SBS) (57%), intestinal dysmotility (24%), mechanical obstructions (14%) and mucosal disease (5%). There were 12 patients transplanted in this study period. The main causes of intestinal failure were SBS (67%) and diffuse portomesenteric thrombosis (20%). Indication for ITx were life-threatening complications from HPN or underlying disease. The 5-year patient survival was 83.3%. For HPN patients, the total annual costs remained quite stable at a median of € 59 524 (58 731 - 65 807). HPN costs (basic costs and treatment of complications) accounted for 76% of these costs. After ITx, the first year costs were € 172 133 (122 483 - 351 407) which then drops to € 8 832 (3 270 - 38 723) in year 5 (Figure 1).

Conclusions: ITx has a high initial cost compared to stable, adult HPN patients. From year 2 onwards, ITx patients cost less than stable HPN patients. By year 4, the additional costs incurred in year 1 of ITx are recovered making the procedure cost effective.

You must be logged in to view recordings

Important Disclaimer

By viewing the material on this site you understand and accept that:

  1. The opinions and statements expressed on this site reflect the views of the author or authors and do not necessarily reflect those of The Transplantation Society and/or its Sections.
  2. The hosting of material on The Transplantation Society site does not signify endorsement of this material by The Transplantation Society and/or its Sections.
  3. The material is solely for educational purposes for qualified health care professionals.
  4. The Transplantation Society and/or its Sections are not liable for any decision made or action taken based on the information contained in the material on this site.
  5. The information cannot be used as a substitute for professional care.
  6. The information does not represent a standard of care.
  7. No physician-patient relationship is being established.