Literature DB >> 28508348

Cost analysis of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer performed by a single surgeon in an Italian center: an update in gynecologic oncological field.

Antonio Pellegrino1, Gianluca Raffaello Damiani2, Giorgio Fachechi1, Cecilia Pirovano1, Maria Gaetani3, Aly Youssef3.   

Abstract

The objective of this study is to perform an economic analysis and examine the influence of procedural volume of our hospital, evaluating the accounting systems of Robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) vs Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (TLRH) in patients with cervical carcinoma, due to the costs widely variable and lack in literature. Costs were collected prospectively, from March 2010 to March 2016. Direct costs were determined by examining the overall medical pathway for each type of intervention. 52 patients with cervical carcinoma, which were matched by age, body mass index, tumor size, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage, comorbidity, previous neoadjuvant chemotherapy, histology type, and tumor grade to obtain homogeneous samples. Surgical time was similar for both the groups. RRH was associated with a significantly less (EBL) estimated blood loss (P = 0.000). The overall median length of follow-up was of 59 months. The cost of the robot-specific supplies was €2705 per intervention. When considering overall medical surgical care, the patient treatment average cost of an RRH was €5650,31 with an hospital stay (HS) of 3.58 days (SD ± 1) vs €3750.86 for TRLH, with an HS of 4.27 days (SD ± 1.79). Our results are similar to Finnish data; the costs of robot-assisted hysterectomies were 1.5 times higher than TLRH. The main drivers of additional costs are robotic disposable instruments, which are not compensated by the hospital room costs and by an experienced team staff. Implementation of strategies to reduce the cost of robotic instrumentation is due. RRH resulted less expensive than robotic simple hysterectomy for benign conditions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cervical cancer; Complications; Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy; Long-term follow-up; Overall survival; Progression-free survival; Robotic cost; Robotic radical hysterectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28508348     DOI: 10.1007/s13304-017-0462-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Updates Surg        ISSN: 2038-131X


  13 in total

1.  New technology and health care costs--the case of robot-assisted surgery.

Authors:  Gabriel I Barbash; Sherry A Glied
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2010-08-19       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 2.  Classification of radical hysterectomy.

Authors:  Denis Querleu; C Paul Morrow
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 41.316

3.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic transperitoneal deep pelvic lymphadenectomy for metastatic melanoma of the lower limb: initial report of four cases and outcomes at 1-year follow-up.

Authors:  Antonio Pellegrino; Gianluca Raffaello Damiani; Michela Terruzzi; Davide Strippoli; Laura Bigi
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2013-03-22

Review 4.  A systematic review and cost analysis of robot-assisted hysterectomy in malignant and benign conditions.

Authors:  Anna-Maija Tapper; Mikko Hannola; Rainer Zeitlin; Jaana Isojärvi; Harri Sintonen; Tuija S Ikonen
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol       Date:  2014-03-15       Impact factor: 2.435

5.  Cost analysis of minimally invasive hysterectomy vs open approach performed by a single surgeon in an Italian center.

Authors:  Antonio Pellegrino; Gianluca Raffaello Damiani; Giorgio Fachechi; Silvia Corso; Cecilia Pirovano; Claudia Trio; Mario Villa; Daniela Turoli; Aly Youssef
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2016-07-26

6.  Robotic Shaving Technique in 25 Patients Affected by Deep Infiltrating Endometriosis of the Rectovaginal Space.

Authors:  Antonio Pellegrino; Gianluca Raffaello Damiani; Claudia Trio; Paolo Faccioli; Paolo Croce; Fulvio Tagliabue; Emanuele Dainese
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2015-06-10       Impact factor: 4.137

7.  Comparing robot-assisted with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: impact on cost and clinical outcomes.

Authors:  Resad P Pasic; John A Rizzo; Hai Fang; Susan Ross; Matt Moore; Candace Gunnarsson
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2010-09-17       Impact factor: 4.137

8.  [Study of surplus cost of robotic assistance for radical hysterectomy, versus laparotomy and standard laparoscopy].

Authors:  T Dennis; C de Mendonça; J Phalippou; P Collinet; L Boulanger; F Weingertner; E Leblanc; F Narducci
Journal:  Gynecol Obstet Fertil       Date:  2012-01-16

9.  Feasibility and surgical outcomes of conventional and robot-assisted laparoscopy for early-stage ovarian cancer: a retrospective, multicenter analysis.

Authors:  Adriano Bellia; Salvatore Giovanni Vitale; Antonio Simone Laganà; Francesco Cannone; Gilles Houvenaeghel; Sandrine Rua; Anais Ladaique; Camille Jauffret; Giuseppe Ettore; Eric Lambaudie
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2016-04-04       Impact factor: 2.344

10.  Safe introduction of ancillary trocars in gynecological surgery: the "yellow island" anatomical landmark.

Authors:  Salvatore Giovanni Vitale; Nicola Gasbarro; Antonio Simone Lagana; Fabrizio Sapia; A M C Rapisarda; Gaetano Valenti; Maria Antonietta Trovato; Diego Rossetti; Benito Chiofalo; Giuseppina Barrasso; Andrea Tinelli; Francesco Corrado
Journal:  Ann Ital Chir       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 0.766

View more
  1 in total

1.  Radical Hysterectomy After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Locally Bulky-Size Cervical Cancer: A Retrospective Comparative Analysis between the Robotic and Abdominal Approaches.

Authors:  Chia-Hao Liu; Yu-Chieh Lee; Jeff Chien-Fu Lin; I-San Chan; Na-Rong Lee; Wen-Hsun Chang; Wei-Min Liu; Peng-Hui Wang
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-10-11       Impact factor: 3.390

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.