[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 35.171.146.16. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Figure 1.
Cost-effectiveness of Surgery Over Varied Time Horizons
Cost-effectiveness of Surgery Over Varied Time Horizons

The 95% CIs for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were determined by probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed using second-order sampling for 100 000 iterations for each time horizon. QALY indicates quality-adjusted life-year.

Figure 2.
One-Way Sensitivity Analysis Over 5-Year Time Horizon
One-Way Sensitivity Analysis Over 5-Year Time Horizon

The 10 parameters that led to the largest effect on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the bariatric surgery vs no surgery when modified were included. The numbers on either side of each bar indicate the extreme parameter values that led to the resulting ICER. This figure is centered around the base case ICER of $91 032 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). GB indicates laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass; SG, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

aParameter values for weight loss can be found in eTables 1 and 2 in the Supplement.

Table 1.  
Base Case Model Inputs
Base Case Model Inputs
Table 2.  
Base Case Results Over Varied Time Horizons
Base Case Results Over Varied Time Horizons
1.
Ogden  CL, Carroll  MD, Kit  BK, Flegal  KM.  Prevalence of childhood and adult obesity in the United States, 2011-2012.  JAMA. 2014;311(8):806-814.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Kelly  AS, Barlow  SE, Rao  G,  et al; American Heart Association Atherosclerosis, Hypertension, and Obesity in the Young Committee of the Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young, Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity and Metabolism, and Council on Clinical Cardiology.  Severe obesity in children and adolescents: identification, associated health risks, and treatment approaches: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association.  Circulation. 2013;128(15):1689-1712.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Danielsson  P, Kowalski  J, Ekblom  Ö, Marcus  C.  Response of severely obese children and adolescents to behavioral treatment.  Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2012;166(12):1103-1108.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Chanoine  JP, Hampl  S, Jensen  C, Boldrin  M, Hauptman  J.  Effect of orlistat on weight and body composition in obese adolescents: a randomized controlled trial.  JAMA. 2005;293(23):2873-2883.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Berkowitz  RI, Fujioka  K, Daniels  SR,  et al; Sibutramine Adolescent Study Group.  Effects of sibutramine treatment in obese adolescents: a randomized trial.  Ann Intern Med. 2006;145(2):81-90.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Inge  TH, Courcoulas  AP, Jenkins  TM,  et al; Teen-LABS Consortium.  Weight loss and health status 3 years after bariatric surgery in adolescents.  N Engl J Med. 2016;374(2):113-123.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Paulus  GF, de Vaan  LE, Verdam  FJ, Bouvy  ND, Ambergen  TA, van Heurn  LW.  Bariatric surgery in morbidly obese adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis.  Obes Surg. 2015;25(5):860-878.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Kelleher  DC, Merrill  CT, Cottrell  LT, Nadler  EP, Burd  RS.  Recent national trends in the use of adolescent inpatient bariatric surgery: 2000 through 2009.  JAMA Pediatr. 2013;167(2):126-132.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Zwintscher  NP, Azarow  KS, Horton  JD, Newton  CR, Martin  MJ.  The increasing incidence of adolescent bariatric surgery.  J Pediatr Surg. 2013;48(12):2401-2407.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Michalsky  M, Reichard  K, Inge  T, Pratt  J, Lenders  C; American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery.  ASMBS pediatric committee best practice guidelines.  Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2012;8(1):1-7.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Inge  TH, Zeller  MH, Jenkins  TM,  et al; Teen-LABS Consortium.  Perioperative outcomes of adolescents undergoing bariatric surgery: the Teen-Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery (Teen-LABS) study.  JAMA Pediatr. 2014;168(1):47-53.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Woolford  SJ, Clark  SJ, Gebremariam  A, Davis  MM, Freed  GL.  To cut or not to cut: physicians’ perspectives on referring adolescents for bariatric surgery.  Obes Surg. 2010;20(7):937-942.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Campbell  J, McGarry  LA, Shikora  SA, Hale  BC, Lee  JT, Weinstein  MC.  Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic gastric banding and bypass for morbid obesity.  Am J Manag Care. 2010;16(7):e174-e187.PubMedGoogle Scholar
14.
Schauer  DP, Arterburn  DE, Livingston  EH, Fischer  D, Eckman  MH.  Decision modeling to estimate the impact of gastric bypass surgery on life expectancy for the treatment of morbid obesity.  Arch Surg. 2010;145(1):57-62.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Young  MT, Gebhart  A, Phelan  MJ, Nguyen  NT.  Use and outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy vs laparoscopic gastric bypass: analysis of the American College of Surgeons NSQIP.  J Am Coll Surg. 2015;220(5):880-885.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
16.
Osland  E, Yunus  RM, Khan  S, Memon  B, Memon  MA.  Late postoperative complications in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LVSG) versus laparoscopic Roux-en-y gastric bypass (LRYGB): meta-analysis and systematic review.  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2016;26(3):193-201.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
17.
Bairdain  S, Samnaliev  M.  Cost-effectiveness of adolescent bariatric surgery.  Cureus. 2015;7(2):e248.PubMedGoogle Scholar
18.
Nguyen  NT, Nguyen  B, Gebhart  A, Hohmann  S.  Changes in the makeup of bariatric surgery: a national increase in use of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.  J Am Coll Surg. 2013;216(2):252-257.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Fontaine  KR, Redden  DT, Wang  C, Westfall  AO, Allison  DB.  Years of life lost due to obesity.  JAMA. 2003;289(2):187-193.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
US Bureau of Labor Statistics. CPI inflation calculator. http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm. Accessed March 13, 2015.
21.
McCormack  K, Wake  B, Perez  J,  et al.  Laparoscopic surgery for inguinal hernia repair: systematic review of effectiveness and economic evaluation.  Health Technol Assess. 2005;9(14):1-203, iii-iv.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
Sullivan  PW, Ghushchyan  V.  Preference-based EQ-5D index scores for chronic conditions in the United States.  Med Decis Making. 2006;26(4):410-420.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
23.
Chung  A, Macario  A, El-Sayed  YY, Riley  ET, Duncan  B, Druzin  ML.  Cost-effectiveness of a trial of labor after previous cesarean.  Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97(6):932-941.PubMedGoogle Scholar
24.
Hoerger  TJ, Zhang  P, Segel  JE, Kahn  HS, Barker  LE, Couper  S.  Cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery for severely obese adults with diabetes.  Diabetes Care. 2010;33(9):1933-1939.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
25.
Dennett  SL, Boye  KS, Yurgin  NR.  The impact of body weight on patient utilities with or without type 2 diabetes: a review of the medical literature.  Value Health. 2008;11(3):478-486.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
26.
Sjöström  L, Narbro  K, Sjöström  CD,  et al; Swedish Obese Subjects Study.  Effects of bariatric surgery on mortality in Swedish obese subjects.  N Engl J Med. 2007;357(8):741-752.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
27.
Neumann  PJ, Cohen  JT, Weinstein  MC.  Updating cost-effectiveness: the curious resilience of the $50,000-per-QALY threshold.  N Engl J Med. 2014;371(9):796-797.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
28.
Keating  CL, Dixon  JB, Moodie  ML,  et al.  Cost-effectiveness of surgically induced weight loss for the management of type 2 diabetes: modeled lifetime analysis.  Diabetes Care. 2009;32(4):567-574.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
29.
McEwen  LN, Coelho  RB, Baumann  LM, Bilik  D, Nota-Kirby  B, Herman  WH.  The cost, quality of life impact, and cost-utility of bariatric surgery in a managed care population.  Obes Surg. 2010;20(7):919-928.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
30.
Picot  J, Jones  J, Colquitt  JL, Loveman  E, Clegg  AJ.  Weight loss surgery for mild to moderate obesity: a systematic review and economic evaluation.  Obes Surg. 2012;22(9):1496-1506.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
31.
Reames  BN, Finks  JF, Bacal  D, Carlin  AM, Dimick  JB.  Changes in bariatric surgery procedure use in Michigan, 2006-2013.  JAMA. 2014;312(9):959-961.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
32.
Weiner  JP, Goodwin  SM, Chang  HY,  et al.  Impact of bariatric surgery on health care costs of obese persons: a 6-year follow-up of surgical and comparison cohorts using health plan data.  JAMA Surg. 2013;148(6):555-562.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
33.
Maciejewski  ML, Arterburn  DE.  Cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery.  JAMA. 2013;310(7):742-743.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
34.
Bleich  SN, Chang  HY, Lau  B,  et al.  Impact of bariatric surgery on health care utilization and costs among patients with diabetes.  Med Care. 2012;50(1):58-65.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
35.
Neovius  M, Narbro  K, Keating  C,  et al.  Health care use during 20 years following bariatric surgery.  JAMA. 2012;308(11):1132-1141.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
36.
Gortmaker  SL, Wang  YC, Long  MW,  et al.  Three interventions that reduce childhood obesity are projected to save more than they cost to implement.  Health Aff (Millwood). 2015;34(11):1932-1939.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
37.
Ingelfinger  JR.  Bariatric surgery in adolescents.  N Engl J Med. 2011;365(15):1365-1367.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Original Investigation
February 2017

Cost-effectiveness of Bariatric Surgery in Adolescents With Obesity

Author Affiliations
  • 1Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston
  • 2Division of Gastroenterology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston
  • 3Now at Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
  • 4Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
  • 5Now at Department of Surgery, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts
JAMA Surg. 2017;152(2):136-141. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2016.3640
Key Points

Question  Is bariatric surgery a cost-effective treatment for adolescents with severe obesity?

Findings  In this cost-effectiveness analysis, a mathematical state transition model was used to determine that bariatric surgery has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $154 684 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) when assessed over 3 years, $114 078 per QALY over 4 years, and $91 032 per QALY over 5 years. Thus, bariatric surgery is cost-effective at 5 years using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY.

Meaning  This study underscores the need for long-term clinical trials in adolescents with at least 5 years of follow-up data that capture financial and quality-of-life end points.

Abstract

Importance  Severe obesity affects 4% to 6% of US youth and is increasing in prevalence. Bariatric surgery for the treatment of adolescents with severe obesity is becoming more common, but data on cost-effectiveness are limited.

Objective  To assess the cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery for adolescents with obesity using recently published results from the Teen-Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery study.

Design, Setting, and Patients  A state-transition model was constructed to compare 2 strategies: no surgery and bariatric surgery. In the no surgery strategy, patients remained at their initial body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) over time. In the bariatric surgery strategy, patients were subjected to risks of perioperative mortality and complications as well as initial morbidity but also experienced longer-term quality-of-life improvements associated with weight loss. Cohort demographic information—of the 228 patients included, the mean (SD) age was 17 (1.6) years, the mean (range) body mass index was 53 (34-88), and 171 (75.0%) were female—surgery-related outcomes, and base case time horizon (3 years) were based on data from the Teen-Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery study. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

Main Outcomes and Measures  Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), total costs (in US dollars adjusted to 2015-year values using the Consumer Price Index), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). A willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY was used to assess cost-effectiveness.

Results  After 3 years, surgery led to a gain of 0.199 QALYs compared with no surgery at an incremental cost of $30 747, yielding an unfavorable ICER of $154 684 per QALY. When the clinical study results were extrapolated to 4 years, the ICER decreased to $114 078 per QALY and became cost-effective by 5 years with an ICER of $91 032 per QALY. Outcomes were robust in most 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

Conclusions and Relevance  Bariatric surgery incurs substantial initial cost and morbidity. We found that surgery could be a cost-effective treatment for adolescents with severe obesity if assessed over a time horizon of 5 years. Our study underscores the need for long-term clinical trials in adolescents with at least 5 years of follow-up data that capture financial and quality-of-life end points.

Introduction

Overweight and obesity affect more than one-third of children and adolescents in the United States.1 Severe obesity, defined as a body mass index (BMI, calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) of 35 or greater or 120% of the 95th percentile or greater (whichever is lower), affects 4% to 6% of US youth and is growing more prevalent.2 Behavioral intervention is the first-line treatment for adolescents with severe obesity, but this type of intervention rarely leads to meaningful long-term weight loss in this population.2 One recent study3 indicated that behavioral treatment had no effect whatsoever on adolescents with severe obesity when assessed 1, 2, and 3 years after the intervention. While other studies have found that behavioral therapy results in less than 3% total body weight loss in adolescents with obesity,4,5 this small effect usually does not translate into meaningful change for individuals with very high baseline BMIs.

Bariatric surgery is increasingly being considered as an option for adolescents who have not achieved adequate weight loss through nonsurgical therapy. The Teen-Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery (Teen-LABS) study, which prospectively observed 242 adolescents undergoing weight-loss surgery, found that total body weight decreased by 27% at 3 years after surgery.6 In addition to enabling weight loss, surgery also helped patients avoid obesity-related comorbidities, including type 2 diabetes, renal damage, hypertension, and dyslipidemia.7

Bariatric surgery is performed in approximately 1000 adolescents each year, and its use in US youth is on the rise.8,9 Nevertheless, bariatric procedures for adolescents remain highly controversial. Possible complications include anastomotic leak, sepsis, and bleeding,10 although their occurrence is rare.11 In a 2007 survey, nearly half of primary care physicians indicated that they would not refer adolescents for bariatric surgery.12 However, as surgery continues to develop a track record of efficacy and safety in the adolescent population, it has the potential to become a less controversial and more common therapeutic option. In this setting of increasing use with high initial morbidity and cost, it is important to assess the cost-effectiveness of surgical treatment to inform health care decision making. The Teen-LABS study consortium recently released 3-year results,6 which have enabled us to conduct a reliable cost-effectiveness analysis of bariatric surgery in adolescents.

Methods
Model Overview

We developed a cohort state-transition model, also known as a Markov model, using TreeAge Pro 2015 (TreeAge) to assess the cost-effectiveness of 2 strategies: no surgery and bariatric surgery (eFigure 1 in the Supplement). TreeAge Pro is a software platform that is used to build and analyze state-transition models, which are useful for assessing the effect of treatments including their cost-effectiveness. The mean (SD) age of the 228 patients from the Teen-LABS study was 17 (1.6) years, the mean (range) initial BMI was 53 (34-88), and 171 (75.0%) were female. Cohort demographic information and the time horizon (3 years) were based on data from the Teen-LABS study.6 After the initial analysis, the model was run beyond 3 years. The model cycle length, or time between state transitions, was 1 month. Because this was a mathematical analysis and did not include any individual-level patient data, the Massachusetts General Hospital Institutional Review Board does not require approval and informed consent in this context.

Competing Strategies for Weight Management

In the no surgery strategy, patients remained at their initial BMI over time.13,14 In the bariatric surgery strategy, we based the intervention on the Teen-LABS study, where patients received either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (161 [70.6%]) or sleeve gastrectomy (67 [29.4%]).6 These patients faced a small risk of 30-day mortality, based on data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (Table 1).15 We used mortality data from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database because no deaths occurred in the Teen-LABS study but larger data sets show nonzero mortality. Patients also faced risks of early major complications (ie, life-threatening complications or complications requiring reoperation) and minor complications (eg, readmission for dehydration), which were based on data from the Teen-LABS study.11 Risks of late complications were based on data from a recent meta-analysis.16 We assumed that late complication risks were constant for the first 4 years after the operation and were halved thereafter.13 We estimated the background mortality according to age, sex, and BMI using data from the US Third National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey.19

Costs and Quality-of-Life Adjustments

The model incorporated costs of surgery and complications. Perioperative hospital costs were derived from the University HealthSystem Consortium database.18 Preoperative and postoperative intervention costs were estimated from a study that tracked costs associated with bariatric surgery in adolescents.17 Our model incorporated only costs associated with surgery and surgery-related complications; it did not include health care costs for treating obesity-related comorbidities. All costs from prior years were adjusted to 2015-year US dollars using the Consumer Price Index.20

Surgical patients received an initial quality-of-life decrement associated with the operation, which was applied for 6 weeks.13,21,22 Quality-of-life effects of complications were also incorporated; the quality-of-life decrement was applied for 4 weeks for minor complications and 6 weeks for major complications.13,22,23 We applied a quality-of-life improvement of 0.0056 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) per BMI unit decrease.24,25 Weight-loss data were based on data from the Teen-LABS study until year 3,6 after which weight-loss data were derived from results from the Swedish Obese Subjects study (eTables 1 and 2 in the Supplement).26 Nonsurgical patients experienced no change in weight or quality of life in our analysis.13,14

Outcomes

Study end points included QALYs, total costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). A willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY was used to determine cost-effectiveness.27 To assess the effect of model input uncertainty on cost-effectiveness results, 1-way sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results

In the base case analysis, QALYs accumulated over 3 years for the no surgery and bariatric surgery strategies were 2.057 and 2.256, respectively (Table 2). The bariatric surgery strategy cost $30 747 more than the no surgery strategy over this time horizon. The ICER of bariatric surgery vs no surgery was $154 684 per QALY; using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY, bariatric surgery was not cost-effective (Figure 1). When the time horizon was extended to 4 years, the ICER of bariatric surgery vs no surgery decreased to $114 078 per QALY. Over a 5-year time horizon, this ICER further decreased to $91 032 per QALY, suggesting that bariatric surgery was cost-effective if assessed over a 5-year follow-up.

We performed 1-way sensitivity analyses over 3-, 4-, and 5-year time horizons (Figure 2; eFigures 2 and 3 in the Supplement). Bariatric surgery was never cost-effective over a 3-year time horizon; over a 4-year time horizon, bariatric surgery was cost-effective only if the cost of gastric bypass was set at its minimum value. Over a 5-year duration, bariatric surgery remained cost-effective in most sensitivity analyses. However, when the model was run using the maximum cost of gastric bypass or the maximum probability of late major complications, the ICER exceeded $100 000 per QALY and bariatric surgery was not cost-effective.

Probabilistic sensitivity was performed on the model over varied time horizons. Using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY, bariatric surgery was cost-effective with a probability of 0%, 17%, and 78% over 3, 4, and 5 years, respectively (eFigure 4 in the Supplement). Over a 6-year time horizon, bariatric surgery was cost-effective with a probability of 98%.

Discussion

Our analysis demonstrates the potential value of bariatric surgery for treating adolescents with severe obesity. While bariatric surgery was not cost-effective over a 3-year time horizon—the length of follow-up currently reported in the Teen-LABS study—it could become cost-effective if assessed over a time horizon of 5 years. However, this finding was sensitive to the uncertainty surrounding the initial cost of bariatric surgery and the probability of late complications. Our results underscore the need for long-term clinical trials in adolescents with at least 5 years of follow-up data that capture financial, quality-of-life, and complication end points.

While several analyses have examined the cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery in adults,13,24,28-30 similar studies in children and adolescents are comparatively lacking, perhaps because of a dearth of prospective studies with more than 1 year of follow-up data.17 A strength of our analysis stems from the high-quality and relatively long-term data that we incorporated from a recently published Teen-LABS study,11 which provided 3 years’ worth of comprehensive data on weight loss, complication rates, and quality of life. The Teen-LABS study also included 228 participants who underwent either laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (161) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (67).6 To our knowledge, besides our analysis, 1 other study has assessed the cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery in adolescents,17 and it used clinical data from only 11 patients who all received gastric bypass—a procedure that is becoming less commonly used.18,31

Other analyses focused on adults have long indicated the favorable cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery as a treatment for obesity, including persons with mild, moderate, or severe obesity. Our analysis focused only on adolescents with severe obesity because of a lack of data supporting efficacy or safety of operation in other classes of obesity for adolescents. Several cost-effectiveness analyses have also assessed the additional benefits that bariatric surgery confers to adults with obesity-related comorbidities, such as type 2 diabetes.24,28 Based on the 3-year results from the Teen-LABS study, bariatric surgery may lead to remission of obesity-associated comorbidities at higher rates in adolescents than in adults. In our analysis, we did not explicitly model the benefit of comorbidity improvement after bariatric surgery, such as diabetes and hypertension, which resolved in 95% and 80% of patients, respectively, in the Teen-LABS study.6 However, we accounted for this effect by incorporating BMI-specific mortality, which implicitly reflects the health benefits of comorbidity resolution. Additionally, our decision not to separately model each obesity-related comorbidity is conservative; even without accounting for each obesity-related condition, bariatric surgery is cost-effective over a relatively short time horizon.

Our model shows that bariatric surgery can become cost-effective over a relatively short time horizon, even without incorporating the potential cost savings that may follow bariatric surgery because of decreased health care resource use. We chose to exclude such cost savings from our model because the effect of bariatric surgery on expenditures remains an issue of significant debate, and health care costs do not appear to decrease in the 3 to 6 years immediately following bariatric surgery, even among patients with diabetes.32-34 Our rationale is also supported by the Swedish Obese Subjects study, which found that surgically treated patients incurred more costs than nonsurgical patients in the first 6 years after the operation.35

Like most modeling analyses, ours has limitations. First, we made the simplifying assumption that BMI would remain stable in nonsurgical patients. Thus, our model did not reflect the possibility of obesity severity increasing with age.3 If we modeled any potential weight gain in the nonsurgical patients, then bariatric surgery would have become cost-effective over an even shorter time horizon than we determined. Another limitation to our study is that we did not model gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy separately. It is likely that weight loss, comorbidity resolution, and complication risk differ according to the type of procedure. However, we believe that there are currently insufficient data to allow a meaningful cost-effectiveness comparison of these procedures in the adolescent population.

Conclusions

At present, bariatric surgery is performed in approximately 1000 adolescents per year. Increasing access to bariatric surgery in adolescents, even by a factor of 4, would hardly affect obesity prevalence on a population level.36 For this reason, experts in childhood and adolescent obesity focus primarily on public health interventions, such as taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages, calorie labeling on restaurant menus, and nutrition standards for food in schools. From an individual-patient perspective, though, bariatric surgery can result in life-altering weight loss, which not only leads to the resolution and prevention of disease but also allows patients to avoid the stigma, bullying, and isolation that often accompany severe obesity.37 As evidence supporting the safety and efficacy of bariatric surgery continues to accrue for the adolescent population, it will likely become a more accepted and commonly used therapeutic option. Our analysis indicates that it can also be cost-effective when assessed over a relatively short time horizon. Longer-term studies that track quality of life, weight loss, comorbidity resolution, and health care costs are needed to confirm our findings.

Back to top
Article Information

Corresponding Author: Chin Hur, MD, MPH, Institute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, 101 Merrimac St, 10th Floor, Boston, MA 02114 (chur@mgh.harvard.edu).

Accepted for Publication: June 25, 2016.

Published Online: October 26, 2016. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2016.3640

Author Contributions: Dr Hur had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Concept and design: All Authors.

Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Klebanoff, Chhatwal, Corey, Kaplan, Hur.

Drafting of the manuscript: Klebanoff, Nudel, Hur.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All Authors.

Statistical analysis: Klebanoff, Chhatwal.

Administrative, technical, or material support: Klebanoff, Hur.

Study supervision: Corey, Hur.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

References
1.
Ogden  CL, Carroll  MD, Kit  BK, Flegal  KM.  Prevalence of childhood and adult obesity in the United States, 2011-2012.  JAMA. 2014;311(8):806-814.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Kelly  AS, Barlow  SE, Rao  G,  et al; American Heart Association Atherosclerosis, Hypertension, and Obesity in the Young Committee of the Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young, Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity and Metabolism, and Council on Clinical Cardiology.  Severe obesity in children and adolescents: identification, associated health risks, and treatment approaches: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association.  Circulation. 2013;128(15):1689-1712.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Danielsson  P, Kowalski  J, Ekblom  Ö, Marcus  C.  Response of severely obese children and adolescents to behavioral treatment.  Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2012;166(12):1103-1108.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Chanoine  JP, Hampl  S, Jensen  C, Boldrin  M, Hauptman  J.  Effect of orlistat on weight and body composition in obese adolescents: a randomized controlled trial.  JAMA. 2005;293(23):2873-2883.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Berkowitz  RI, Fujioka  K, Daniels  SR,  et al; Sibutramine Adolescent Study Group.  Effects of sibutramine treatment in obese adolescents: a randomized trial.  Ann Intern Med. 2006;145(2):81-90.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Inge  TH, Courcoulas  AP, Jenkins  TM,  et al; Teen-LABS Consortium.  Weight loss and health status 3 years after bariatric surgery in adolescents.  N Engl J Med. 2016;374(2):113-123.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Paulus  GF, de Vaan  LE, Verdam  FJ, Bouvy  ND, Ambergen  TA, van Heurn  LW.  Bariatric surgery in morbidly obese adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis.  Obes Surg. 2015;25(5):860-878.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Kelleher  DC, Merrill  CT, Cottrell  LT, Nadler  EP, Burd  RS.  Recent national trends in the use of adolescent inpatient bariatric surgery: 2000 through 2009.  JAMA Pediatr. 2013;167(2):126-132.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Zwintscher  NP, Azarow  KS, Horton  JD, Newton  CR, Martin  MJ.  The increasing incidence of adolescent bariatric surgery.  J Pediatr Surg. 2013;48(12):2401-2407.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Michalsky  M, Reichard  K, Inge  T, Pratt  J, Lenders  C; American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery.  ASMBS pediatric committee best practice guidelines.  Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2012;8(1):1-7.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Inge  TH, Zeller  MH, Jenkins  TM,  et al; Teen-LABS Consortium.  Perioperative outcomes of adolescents undergoing bariatric surgery: the Teen-Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery (Teen-LABS) study.  JAMA Pediatr. 2014;168(1):47-53.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Woolford  SJ, Clark  SJ, Gebremariam  A, Davis  MM, Freed  GL.  To cut or not to cut: physicians’ perspectives on referring adolescents for bariatric surgery.  Obes Surg. 2010;20(7):937-942.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Campbell  J, McGarry  LA, Shikora  SA, Hale  BC, Lee  JT, Weinstein  MC.  Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic gastric banding and bypass for morbid obesity.  Am J Manag Care. 2010;16(7):e174-e187.PubMedGoogle Scholar
14.
Schauer  DP, Arterburn  DE, Livingston  EH, Fischer  D, Eckman  MH.  Decision modeling to estimate the impact of gastric bypass surgery on life expectancy for the treatment of morbid obesity.  Arch Surg. 2010;145(1):57-62.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Young  MT, Gebhart  A, Phelan  MJ, Nguyen  NT.  Use and outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy vs laparoscopic gastric bypass: analysis of the American College of Surgeons NSQIP.  J Am Coll Surg. 2015;220(5):880-885.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
16.
Osland  E, Yunus  RM, Khan  S, Memon  B, Memon  MA.  Late postoperative complications in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LVSG) versus laparoscopic Roux-en-y gastric bypass (LRYGB): meta-analysis and systematic review.  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2016;26(3):193-201.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
17.
Bairdain  S, Samnaliev  M.  Cost-effectiveness of adolescent bariatric surgery.  Cureus. 2015;7(2):e248.PubMedGoogle Scholar
18.
Nguyen  NT, Nguyen  B, Gebhart  A, Hohmann  S.  Changes in the makeup of bariatric surgery: a national increase in use of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.  J Am Coll Surg. 2013;216(2):252-257.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Fontaine  KR, Redden  DT, Wang  C, Westfall  AO, Allison  DB.  Years of life lost due to obesity.  JAMA. 2003;289(2):187-193.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
US Bureau of Labor Statistics. CPI inflation calculator. http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm. Accessed March 13, 2015.
21.
McCormack  K, Wake  B, Perez  J,  et al.  Laparoscopic surgery for inguinal hernia repair: systematic review of effectiveness and economic evaluation.  Health Technol Assess. 2005;9(14):1-203, iii-iv.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
Sullivan  PW, Ghushchyan  V.  Preference-based EQ-5D index scores for chronic conditions in the United States.  Med Decis Making. 2006;26(4):410-420.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
23.
Chung  A, Macario  A, El-Sayed  YY, Riley  ET, Duncan  B, Druzin  ML.  Cost-effectiveness of a trial of labor after previous cesarean.  Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97(6):932-941.PubMedGoogle Scholar
24.
Hoerger  TJ, Zhang  P, Segel  JE, Kahn  HS, Barker  LE, Couper  S.  Cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery for severely obese adults with diabetes.  Diabetes Care. 2010;33(9):1933-1939.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
25.
Dennett  SL, Boye  KS, Yurgin  NR.  The impact of body weight on patient utilities with or without type 2 diabetes: a review of the medical literature.  Value Health. 2008;11(3):478-486.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
26.
Sjöström  L, Narbro  K, Sjöström  CD,  et al; Swedish Obese Subjects Study.  Effects of bariatric surgery on mortality in Swedish obese subjects.  N Engl J Med. 2007;357(8):741-752.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
27.
Neumann  PJ, Cohen  JT, Weinstein  MC.  Updating cost-effectiveness: the curious resilience of the $50,000-per-QALY threshold.  N Engl J Med. 2014;371(9):796-797.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
28.
Keating  CL, Dixon  JB, Moodie  ML,  et al.  Cost-effectiveness of surgically induced weight loss for the management of type 2 diabetes: modeled lifetime analysis.  Diabetes Care. 2009;32(4):567-574.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
29.
McEwen  LN, Coelho  RB, Baumann  LM, Bilik  D, Nota-Kirby  B, Herman  WH.  The cost, quality of life impact, and cost-utility of bariatric surgery in a managed care population.  Obes Surg. 2010;20(7):919-928.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
30.
Picot  J, Jones  J, Colquitt  JL, Loveman  E, Clegg  AJ.  Weight loss surgery for mild to moderate obesity: a systematic review and economic evaluation.  Obes Surg. 2012;22(9):1496-1506.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
31.
Reames  BN, Finks  JF, Bacal  D, Carlin  AM, Dimick  JB.  Changes in bariatric surgery procedure use in Michigan, 2006-2013.  JAMA. 2014;312(9):959-961.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
32.
Weiner  JP, Goodwin  SM, Chang  HY,  et al.  Impact of bariatric surgery on health care costs of obese persons: a 6-year follow-up of surgical and comparison cohorts using health plan data.  JAMA Surg. 2013;148(6):555-562.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
33.
Maciejewski  ML, Arterburn  DE.  Cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery.  JAMA. 2013;310(7):742-743.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
34.
Bleich  SN, Chang  HY, Lau  B,  et al.  Impact of bariatric surgery on health care utilization and costs among patients with diabetes.  Med Care. 2012;50(1):58-65.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
35.
Neovius  M, Narbro  K, Keating  C,  et al.  Health care use during 20 years following bariatric surgery.  JAMA. 2012;308(11):1132-1141.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
36.
Gortmaker  SL, Wang  YC, Long  MW,  et al.  Three interventions that reduce childhood obesity are projected to save more than they cost to implement.  Health Aff (Millwood). 2015;34(11):1932-1939.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
37.
Ingelfinger  JR.  Bariatric surgery in adolescents.  N Engl J Med. 2011;365(15):1365-1367.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
×