Cost-Effectiveness of Endoscopic Stricturotomy Versus Resection Surgery for Crohn’s Disease Strictures

<b>Background:</b> Endoscopic therapies for Crohn's disease (CD) strictures, including endoscopic balloon dilation (EBD) and endoscopic stricturotomy (ESt), are less invasive interventions compared to surgery. ESt is advantageous for strictures that are longer, more fibrotic, or adjacent to anatomic structures requiring precision, and it has shown a high rate of surgery-free survival. <b>Methods:</b> We designed a microsimulation state-transition model comparing ESt to surgical resection for CD strictures. We calculated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over a 10-year time horizon; secondary outcomes included costs (in 2022 USD) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). We used a societal perspective to compare our strategies at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 100,000 USD/QALY. Sensitivity analyses, both deterministic and probabilistic, were performed. <b>Results</b>: The surgery strategy cost more than 2.5 times the ESt strategy, but resulted in nine more QALYs per 100 persons. The ICER for the surgery strategy was 308,787 USD/QALY; thus, the ESt strategy was determined more cost-effective. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that quality of life after ESt as compared to that after surgery, the likelihood of repeat intervention, and surgical mortality and cost were the most influential parameters shifting cost-effectiveness. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses favored ESt in most (65.5%) iterations. <b>Conclusions:</b> Our study finds endoscopic stricturotomy to be a cost-effective strategy to manage primary or anastomotic Crohn's disease strictures. Post-intervention quality of life and probabilities of requiring repeated interventions exert most influence on cost-effectiveness. The decision between ESt and surgery should be made considering patient and stricture characteristics, preferences, and cost-effectiveness.