TY - JOUR
T1 - Cost-effectiveness of robotic vs laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. Results from the national prospective trial ROBOCOSTES
AU - Guerrero-Ortiz, María Alejandra
AU - Sánchez-Velazquez, Patricia
AU - Burdío, Fernando
AU - Gimeno, Marta
AU - Podda, Mauro
AU - Pellino, Gianluca
AU - Toledano, Miguel
AU - Nuñez, Javier
AU - Bellido, Juan
AU - Acosta-Mérida, María Asunción
AU - Vicente, Emilio
AU - Lopez-Ben, Santiago
AU - Pacheco, David
AU - Pando, Elizabeth
AU - Jorba, Rosa
AU - Trujillo, Juan Pablo Arjona
AU - Ausania, Fabio
AU - Alvarez, Mario
AU - Fernandes, Nair
AU - Castro-Boix, Sandra
AU - Gantxegu, Amaia
AU - Carré, Miquel Kraft
AU - Pinto-Fuentes, Pilar
AU - Bueno-Cañones, Alejandro
AU - Valdes-Hernandez, Javier
AU - Tresierra, Luis
AU - Caruso, Riccardo
AU - Ferri, Valentina
AU - Tio, Berta
AU - Babiloni-Simon, Sonia
AU - Lacasa-Martin, David
AU - González-Abós, Carolina
AU - Guevara-Martinez, Jenny
AU - Gutierrez-Iscar, Eduardo
AU - Sanchez-Santos, Raquel
AU - Cano-Valderrama, Oscar
AU - Nogueira-Sixto, Manuel
AU - Alvarez-Garrido, Nicolas
AU - Martinez-Cortijo, Sagrario
AU - Lasaia, Manuel Alberto
AU - Linacero, Santiago
AU - Morante, Ana Pilar
AU - Rotellar, Fernando
AU - Arredondo, Jorge
AU - Marti, Pablo
AU - Sabatella, Lucas
AU - Zozaya, Gabriel
AU - Ielpo, Benedetto
N1 - © 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2024/8/13
Y1 - 2024/8/13
N2 - Introduction: Although several studies report that the robotic approach is more costly than laparoscopy, the cost-effectiveness of robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) over laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is still an issue. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of the RDP and LDP approaches across several Spanish centres. Methods: This study is an observational, multicenter, national prospective study (ROBOCOSTES). For one year from 2022, all consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy were included, and clinical, QALY, and cost data were prospectively collected. The primary aim was to analyze the cost-effectiveness between RDP and LDP. Results: During the study period, 80 procedures from 14 Spanish centres were analyzed. LDP had a shorter operative time than the RDP approach (192.2 min vs 241.3 min, p = 0.004). RDP showed a lower conversion rate (19.5% vs 2.5%, p = 0.006) and a lower splenectomy rate (60% vs 26.5%, p = 0.004). A statistically significant difference was reported for the Comprehensive Complication Index between the two study groups, favouring the robotic approach (12.7 vs 6.1, p = 0.022). RDP was associated with increased operative costs of 1600 euros (p < 0.031), while overall cost expenses resulted in being 1070.92 Euros higher than the LDP but without a statistically significant difference (p = 0.064). The mean QALYs at 90 days after surgery for RDP (0.9534) were higher than those of LDP (0.8882) (p = 0.030). At a willingness-to-pay threshold of 20,000 and 30,000 euros, there was a 62.64% and 71.30% probability that RDP was more cost-effective than LDP, respectively. Conclusions: The RDP procedure in the Spanish healthcare system appears more cost-effective than the LDP.
AB - Introduction: Although several studies report that the robotic approach is more costly than laparoscopy, the cost-effectiveness of robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) over laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is still an issue. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of the RDP and LDP approaches across several Spanish centres. Methods: This study is an observational, multicenter, national prospective study (ROBOCOSTES). For one year from 2022, all consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy were included, and clinical, QALY, and cost data were prospectively collected. The primary aim was to analyze the cost-effectiveness between RDP and LDP. Results: During the study period, 80 procedures from 14 Spanish centres were analyzed. LDP had a shorter operative time than the RDP approach (192.2 min vs 241.3 min, p = 0.004). RDP showed a lower conversion rate (19.5% vs 2.5%, p = 0.006) and a lower splenectomy rate (60% vs 26.5%, p = 0.004). A statistically significant difference was reported for the Comprehensive Complication Index between the two study groups, favouring the robotic approach (12.7 vs 6.1, p = 0.022). RDP was associated with increased operative costs of 1600 euros (p < 0.031), while overall cost expenses resulted in being 1070.92 Euros higher than the LDP but without a statistically significant difference (p = 0.064). The mean QALYs at 90 days after surgery for RDP (0.9534) were higher than those of LDP (0.8882) (p = 0.030). At a willingness-to-pay threshold of 20,000 and 30,000 euros, there was a 62.64% and 71.30% probability that RDP was more cost-effective than LDP, respectively. Conclusions: The RDP procedure in the Spanish healthcare system appears more cost-effective than the LDP.
KW - Cost-effectiveness analysis
KW - Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy
KW - Minimally invasive surgery
KW - Quality of life analysis
KW - Robotic distal pancreatectomy
KW - Cost-effectiveness analysis
KW - Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy
KW - Minimally invasive surgery
KW - Quality of life analysis
KW - Robotic distal pancreatectomy
KW - Cost-effectiveness analysis
KW - Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy
KW - Minimally invasive surgery
KW - Quality of life analysis
KW - Robotic distal pancreatectomy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85201236443&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/9835f2ad-c51c-31a9-b765-15c431c4fba4/
UR - https://portalrecerca.uab.cat/en/publications/311ad1ac-c902-44af-bc7d-dda8218e9b4c
U2 - 10.1007/s00464-024-11109-x
DO - 10.1007/s00464-024-11109-x
M3 - Article
C2 - 39138678
AN - SCOPUS:85201236443
SN - 0930-2794
VL - 38
SP - 6270
EP - 6281
JO - Surgical Endoscopy
JF - Surgical Endoscopy
ER -