IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0254063.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-effectiveness of procedure-less intragastric balloon therapy as substitute or complement to bariatric surgery

Author

Listed:
  • Shweta Mital
  • Hai V Nguyen

Abstract

Background: Procedure-less intragastric balloon (PIGB) eliminates costs and risks of endoscopic placement/removal and involves lower risk of serious complications compared with bariatric surgery, albeit with lower weight loss. Given the vast unmet need for obesity treatment, an important question is whether PIGB treatment is cost-effective—either stand-alone or as a bridge to bariatric surgery. Methods: We developed a microsimulation model to compare the costs and effectiveness of six treatment strategies: PIGB, gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy as stand-alone treatments, PIGB as a bridge to gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy, and no treatment. Results: PIGB as a bridge to bariatric surgery is less costly and more effective than bariatric surgery alone as it helps to achieve a lower post-operative BMI. Of the six strategies, PIGB as a bridge to sleeve gastrectomy is the most cost-effective with an ICER of $3,781 per QALY gained. While PIGB alone is not cost-effective compared with bariatric surgery, it is cost-effective compared with no treatment with an ICER of $21,711 per QALY. Conclusions: PIGB can yield cost savings and improve health outcomes if used as a bridge to bariatric surgery and is cost-effective as a stand-alone treatment for patients lacking access or unwilling to undergo surgery.

Suggested Citation

  • Shweta Mital & Hai V Nguyen, 2021. "Cost-effectiveness of procedure-less intragastric balloon therapy as substitute or complement to bariatric surgery," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(7), pages 1-15, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0254063
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254063
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0254063
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0254063&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0254063?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0254063. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.