Literature DB >> 32240383

Cost-effectiveness and quality of life analysis of laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy: a propensity score-matched study.

Matteo De Pastena1, Alessandro Esposito2, Salvatore Paiella2, Niccolò Surci2, Greta Montagnini2, Giovanni Marchegiani2, Giuseppe Malleo2, Erica Secchettin2, Luca Casetti2, Claudio Ricci3, Luca Landoni2, Chiara Bovo4, Claudio Bassi2, Roberto Salvia2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study analyzed the Quality of Life (QoL) and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic (LDP) versus robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP).
METHOD: All patients who underwent LDP or RDP from 2011 to 2017 and with a minimum postoperative follow-up of 12 months were included in the study. To minimize bias, a propensity score-matched analysis (1:2) was performed. Two different questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D) were completed by the patients. The mean differential cost and mean differential Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALY) were calculated and plotted on a cost-utility plane.
RESULTS: The study population consisted of 152 patients. After having applied the propensity score matching, the final population included 103 patients divided into RDP group (n = 37, 36%) and LDP (n = 66, 64%). No differences were found between groups regarding the baseline, intraoperative, postoperative, and pathological variables (p > 0.05). The QoL analysis showed a significant improvement in the RDP group on the postoperative social function, nausea, vomiting, and financial status (p = 0.010, p = 0.050, and p = 0.030, respectively). As expected, the crude costs analysis confirmed that RDP was more expensive than LDP (12,053 Euros vs. 5519 Euros, p < 0.001). However, the robotic approach had a higher probability of being more cost-effective than the laparoscopic procedure when a willingness to pay of more than 4800 Euros/QALY was accepted.
CONCLUSION: RDP was associated with QoL improvement in specific domains. Crude costs were higher relative to LDP. Cost-effectiveness threshold resulted to be 4800 euros/QALY. The increasing worldwide diffusion of the robotic technology, with easier access and possible cost reduction, could increase the sustainability of this procedure.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cost analysis; Laparoscopic pancreatectomy; Minimally invasive pancreatectomy; Quality of life analysis; Robotic surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32240383     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-020-07528-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  1 in total

Review 1.  Laparoscopic surgery of the pancreas.

Authors:  A Cuschieri
Journal:  J R Coll Surg Edinb       Date:  1994-06
  1 in total
  13 in total

Review 1.  [Evidence in minimally invasive surgery of the pancreas].

Authors:  Ekatarina Petrova; Charlotte Müller-Debus; Kim Honselmann; Ulrich Wellner; Tobias Keck
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2021-01-11       Impact factor: 0.955

2.  A randomized controlled trial of stapled versus ultrasonic transection in distal pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Luca Landoni; Matteo De Pastena; Giovanni Butturini; Roberto Salvia; Martina Fontana; Giuseppe Malleo; Alessandro Esposito; Luca Casetti; Giovanni Marchegiani; Massimiliano Tuveri; Salvatore Paiella; Antonio Pea; Marco Ramera; Alex Borin; Alessandro Giardino; Isabella Frigerio; Roberto Girelli; Claudio Bassi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2021-09-13       Impact factor: 3.453

3.  The role of the robot-assisted procedure during total pancreatectomy: a viewpoint.

Authors:  Matteo De Pastena; Alessandro Esposito; Roberto Salvia
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2021-06       Impact factor: 7.293

Review 4.  Improvement in distal pancreatectomy for tumors in the body and tail of the pancreas.

Authors:  Li Jiang; Deng Ning; Xiao-Ping Chen
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-02-15       Impact factor: 2.754

5.  Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Qingbo Feng; Chuang Jiang; Xuping Feng; Yan Du; Wenwei Liao; Hongyu Jin; Mingheng Liao; Yong Zeng; Jiwei Huang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-09-20       Impact factor: 6.244

6.  Modified Frailty Index to Assess Risk in Elderly Patients Undergoing Distal Pancreatectomy: A Retrospective Single-Center Study.

Authors:  Salvatore Paiella; Matteo De Pastena; Alessandro Esposito; Erica Secchettin; Luca Casetti; Giuseppe Malleo; Greta Montagnini; Elisa Bannone; Giacomo Deiro; Beatrice Bampa; Marco Ramera; Luca Landoni; Alberto Balduzzi; Claudio Bassi; Roberto Salvia
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 7.  The current status and future directions of robotic pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Kohei Nakata; Masafumi Nakamura
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol Surg       Date:  2021-03-04

8.  Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: a case-matched cost-analysis between robot-assisted surgery and direct manual laparoscopy.

Authors:  Gregorio Di Franco; Andrea Peri; Valentina Lorenzoni; Matteo Palmeri; Niccolò Furbetta; Simone Guadagni; Desirée Gianardi; Matteo Bianchini; Luca Emanuele Pollina; Franca Melfi; Domenica Mamone; Carlo Milli; Giulio Di Candio; Giuseppe Turchetti; Andrea Pietrabissa; Luca Morelli
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2021-02-03       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy: a single centre propensity score matching analysis.

Authors:  Riccardo Casadei; Carlo Ingaldi; Claudio Ricci; Laura Alberici; Emilio De Raffele; Maria Chiara Vaccaro; Francesco Minni
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2021-04-03

10.  Robotic Dual-Console Distal Pancreatectomy: Could it be Considered a Safe Approach and Surgical Teaching even in Pancreatic Surgery? A Retrospective Observational Study Cohort.

Authors:  M De Pastena; R Salvia; S Paiella; G Deiro; E Bannone; A Balduzzi; T Giuliani; L Casetti; M Ramera; C Filippini; G Montagnini; L Landoni; A Esposito
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2021-07-24       Impact factor: 3.352

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.