Literature DB >> 24135382

Overall care cost comparison between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for endometrial and cervical cancer.

H Desille-Gbaguidi1, T Hebert, J Paternotte-Villemagne, C Gaborit, E Rush, G Body.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of our medico-economic study was to compare robotic surgery cost with conventional laparoscopic cost in endometrial and cervical cancer. STUDY
DESIGN: Our study included laparoscopic and robot-assisted procedures (radical hysterectomies and lymphadenectomies) for endometrial or cervical cancer ever since first using the Da Vinci® in 2008 within a hospital setting. In the hospital perspective, direct costs were determined by examining the overall medical pathway for each type of intervention. Actual costs were calculated for 27 conventional laparoscopic procedures and for 30 robot-assisted procedures including initial cost of the robot and its maintenance. We estimated the complete medical "overall care" costs by adding the costs of consultations, surgery and post-operative hospital stay to the costs of any eventual emergency consultation and/or hospitalisation within the two months that followed surgery. A sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the effects of variable modulations.
RESULTS: For endometrial cancer, surgical procedure cost for robotic-assisted surgery was €7402 compared to €2733 for conventional laparoscopic surgery. When considering overall medical care, the patient treatment average cost was €6666 for the laparoscopic group (with an average length of stay of 5.27 days) as compared to €10,816 for robotic group (with an average hospital stay of 4.60 days), p=0.39. For cervical cancer, average surgical cost with robotic-assisted surgery was €8501 compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery at €3239. For cervical cancer, overall care average cost was €7803 for the laparoscopic group (with an average length of stay of 5.83 days) as compared to €12,211 for the robotic group (with an average hospital stay of 4.70 days) p=0.07. Sensitivity analysis results confirmed the cost overrun with the use of robotic assisted surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: Conventional laparoscopy was less expensive in our institution than robotic-assisted surgery for the surgery of endometrial (1:2.7) and cervical (1:2.6) cancers. When considering overall medical care, the use of robotic-assisted surgery was found to be 1.6 times more expensive than conventional surgery.
Copyright © 2013. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cost analysis; Laparoscopic hysterectomy; Robotic assistance; Robotic hysterectomy; Robotic versus laparoscopic

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24135382     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.09.025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol        ISSN: 0301-2115            Impact factor:   2.435


  19 in total

1.  Change in cost after 5 years of experience with robotic-assisted hysterectomy for the treatment of endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Andrea M Avondstondt; Michelle Wallenstein; Christopher R D'Adamo; Robert M Ehsanipoor
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2017-04-24

Review 2.  Robotic surgery in gynecology.

Authors:  Ibrahim Alkatout; Liselotte Mettler; Nicolai Maass; Johannes Ackermann
Journal:  J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc       Date:  2016-12-01

3.  High tech or high risk? An analysis of media reports about robotic surgery.

Authors:  Zita Ficko; Kevin Koo; Elias S Hyams
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2016-10-24

4.  Robotic or laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy versus open sacrohysteropexy for uterus preservation in pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Jiheum Paek; Maria Lee; Bo Wook Kim; Yongil Kwon
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2015-10-29       Impact factor: 2.894

5.  Robotic surgery in public hospitals of Latin-America: a castle of sand?

Authors:  Fernando P Secin; Rafael Coelho; Juan I Monzó Gardiner; Jose Gadú Campos Salcedo; Roberto Puente; Levin Martínez; Diana Finkelstein; Rair Valero; Antonio León; Daniel Angeloni; José Rozanec; Milton Berger; Leandro Totti Cavazzola; Eliney Ferreira Faria; Roberto Días Machado; Felipe Lott; Franz Campos; Jorge G Morales Montor; Carlos Sánchez Moreno; Hugo Dávila Barrios
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-02-19       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  Health care cost consequences of using robot technology for hysterectomy: a register-based study of consecutive patients during 2006-2013.

Authors:  Karin Rosenkilde Laursen; Vibe Bolvig Hyldgård; Pernille Tine Jensen; Rikke Søgaard
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2017-07-10

7.  Impact of body mass index and operative approach on surgical morbidity and costs in women with endometrial carcinoma and hyperplasia.

Authors:  Rudy S Suidan; Weiguo He; Charlotte C Sun; Hui Zhao; Nicole D Fleming; Pedro T Ramirez; Pamela T Soliman; Shannon N Westin; Karen H Lu; Sharon H Giordano; Larissa A Meyer
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2017-01-26       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  Robot-assisted surgery in gynaecology.

Authors:  Theresa A Lawrie; Hongqian Liu; DongHao Lu; Therese Dowswell; Huan Song; Lei Wang; Gang Shi
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-04-15

9.  Understanding drivers of hospital charge variation for episodes of care among patients undergoing hepatopancreatobiliary surgery.

Authors:  Aslam Ejaz; Yuhree Kim; Gaya Spolverato; Ryan Taylor; John Hundt; Timothy M Pawlik
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2015-08-08       Impact factor: 3.647

10.  Synchronous primary colorectal and liver metastasis: impact of operative approach on clinical outcomes and hospital charges.

Authors:  Aslam Ejaz; Eugene Semenov; Gaya Spolverato; Yuhree Kim; Dylan Tanner; John Hundt; Timothy M Pawlik
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2014-06-26       Impact factor: 3.647

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.