Literature DB >> 29779842

A cost-effectiveness modeling study of robot-assisted (RARC) versus open radical cystectomy (ORC) for bladder cancer to inform future research.

Charlotte T J Michels1, Carl J Wijburg2, Erik Leijte3, J Alfred Witjes4, Maroeska M Rovers3, Janneke P C Grutters3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Open radical cystectomy (ORC) is regarded the standard treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer, but robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) is increasingly used in practice. However, it is unclear whether RARC provides value for money.
OBJECTIVE: To identify the main evidence gaps and main drivers of cost-effectiveness, comparing RARC to ORC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A decision analytical model was developed to study the 30d and 90d postoperative complications with RARC versus ORC and their related cost in bladder cancer patients. Input data were derived from systematic literature searches, meta-analyses, internal databases and expert opinion. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Cost per saved complication (in Clavien-Dindo grading) was determined. Deterministic sensitivity analyses was performed to search for threshold values for RARC to become cost saving. Uncertainty was addressed using probabilistic sensitivity analyses.
RESULTS: The expected 30d and 90d risk for a minor complication was lower for RARC than ORC (37% vs. 45% and 32% vs. 36%). The expected 30d and 90d risk of RARC versus ORC for a major complication was 18% vs. 23% and 16% vs. 25%. The 30d and 90d extra costs needed to prevent one major complication were €62,582 and €37,007, respectively. Data on the impact of complications on quality of life were lacking. Three scenarios resulted in cost savings for RARC: operating time (threshold: ≤175min), length of stay (≤4d), and RARC equipment (≤€281).
CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests that it is unlikely that RARC will become less expensive than ORC. However, RARC might result in fewer complications. To determine value for money, research is needed into the consequences of these complications in terms of quality of life. PATIENT
SUMMARY: Economic modeling showed that RARC might result in fewer complications, but is more expensive than ORC. Future research should focus on the impact on quality of life.
Copyright © 2018 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bladder cancer; cost-effectiveness; radical cystectomy; robot-assisted

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29779842     DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2018.04.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol Focus        ISSN: 2405-4569


  6 in total

1.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of two kinds of bladder cancer urinary diversion: Studer versus Bricker.

Authors:  Weipu Mao; Jinbo Xie; Yuan Wu; Zonglin Wu; Keyi Wang; Heng Shi; Hui Zhang; Bo Peng; Jiang Geng
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2020-06

Review 2.  Robotic assisted radical cystectomy versus open radical cystectomy: a review of what we do and don't know.

Authors:  Zeynep G Gul; Andrew B Katims; Jared S Winoker; Peter Wiklund; Nikhil Waingankar; Reza Mehrazin
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-05

3.  Cost comparison between open radical cystectomy, laparoscopic radical cystectomy, and robot-assisted radical cystectomy for patients with bladder cancer: a systematic review of segmental costs.

Authors:  Yasuhiro Morii; Takahiro Osawa; Teppei Suzuki; Nobuo Shinohara; Toru Harabayashi; Tomoki Ishikawa; Takumi Tanikawa; Hiroko Yamashina; Katsuhiko Ogasawara
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2019-11-08       Impact factor: 2.264

4.  Systematic review and meta-analysis on laparoscopic cystectomy in bladder cancer.

Authors:  Jialiang Zhu; Ziwen Lu; Wanbo Chen; Mang Ke; Xianguo Cai
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2022-01

5.  Robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open radical cystectomy: surgical data of 1400 patients from The Italian Radical Cystectomy Registry on intraoperative outcomes.

Authors:  Angelo Porreca; Luca Di Gianfrancesco; Walter Artibani; Gian Maria Busetto; Giuseppe Carrieri; Alessandro Antonelli; Lorenzo Bianchi; Eugenio Brunocilla; Aldo Massimo Bocciardi; Marco Carini; Antonio Celia; Giovanni Cochetti; Andrea Gallina; Ettore Mearini; Andrea Minervini; Riccardo Schiavina; Sergio Serni; Daniele D'Agostino; Erica Debbi; Paolo Corsi; Alessandro Crestani
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2022-05-04

6.  How can robot-assisted surgery provide value for money?

Authors:  Sejal Patel; Maroeska M Rovers; Michiel J P Sedelaar; Petra L M Zusterzeel; Ad F T M Verhagen; Camiel Rosman; Janneke P C Grutters
Journal:  BMJ Surg Interv Health Technol       Date:  2021-02-05
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.