Robotic adrenalectomy: evaluation of cost-effectiveness.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: De Crea C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7347830 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Robotic adrenalectomy: evaluation of cost-effectiveness.
De Crea Carmela C Arcuri Giovanni G Pennestrì Francesco F Paolantonio Chiara C Bellantone Rocco R Raffaelli Marco M
Gland surgery 20200601 3
Laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA) is the preferred treatment option for adrenal lesions, considering the improved patients outcomes, due to the reduced postoperative morbidity and postoperative pain, the faster recovery and the shorter length of hospital stay. The widespread diffusion of robotic technology led to the development and standardization of robot-assisted approach to adrenalectomy. However, to date, no clear benefit from the use of the robot-assisted approach has been found. The higher ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Objective To explore the advantages and disadvantages of robot-assisted laparoscopic adrenalectomy compared with retroperitoneal laparoscopic adrenalectomy. Methods A total of 101 patients with adrenal tumors who received retroperitoneal laparoscopic adrenalectomy (RLA) (n=75) or robot-assisted laparoscopic adrenalectomy (RARLA) (n=26) in our hospital from January 2021 to December 2021 were retrospectively collected. Patients’ demographics, tumor characteristics, and perioperative indicators were compared. Statistical analysis was performed using t-test for continuous variables and Pearson chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. Results We found that blood loss in the RARLA group was significantly less than that in the RLA group (66.9 ± 35.5 ml vs 91.5 ± 66.1 ml, p = 0.020). Gastrointestinal function recovery time in RARLA group was significantly less than that in RLA group (19.9 ± 6.9 hours vs 32.0 ± 9.0 hours, p < 0.001). However, the operation time, drainage tube placement time, post-operative hospital stay in the RARLA group were significantly longer compared with the RLA group (149.6 ± 53.4 mins vs 118.7 ± 41.2 mins, p = 0.003; 4.9 ± 2.0 days vs 3.6 ± 1.1 days, p = 0.004; 6.4 ± 1.8 days vs 4.6 ± 1.6 days, p < 0.001). The hospitalization expense in the RARLA group is significantly higher than that in the RLA group (59284 ± 8724 RMB¥ vs 39785 ± 10126 RMB¥, p < 0.001). We found that there was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups. However, the pathological types of the two groups were significantly different. Patients in the RLA group had a higher proportion of adrenocortical adenoma, while patients in the RARLA group had a higher proportion of pheochromocytoma. Conclusion Compared with traditional laparoscopic adrenalectomy, robot-assisted laparoscopic adrenalectomy can significantly reduce intraoperative blood loss and accelerate postoperative gastrointestinal recovery. It is committed to studying how to reduce the hospitalization time and hospitalization cost of RARLA, which can make RARLA more widely used.
| S-EPMC10018030 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The application of adrenal surgery has been spreading steadily in recent years. With the increased use of robotics in surgery, robotic adrenalectomy (RA), especially for the posterior retroperitoneoscopic approach, has been taken on by many high-volume institutions as a good option over the standard laparoscopic approach (LA). This paper reviews the recent literature from May 2010 up to November 2019 with the aim of analyzing RA complications in order to identify risk factors for complications after RA. We analyzed 7 principal risk factors for complication: body mass index (BMI), age, tumor size, tumor side, pathology, previous surgery, and surgeon experience. In the review, some studies identified tumor size, malignancy type, completion of learning curve and, and less clearly, previous ipsilateral upper mesocolic or retroperitoneal surgery, as risk factors for postoperative complications and failure of robotic surgery. Whether RA is meaningfully superior to the standard minimally invasive approach is still a subject of discussion. RA appears safer by virtue of its reduction in hospital stay, lower blood loss, and equivalent complication rates, and surgeons should prefer adrenalectomy over the LA. Despite these advantages, the operative time and the overall cost of the robotic procedure are higher than the LA. Further high-quality trials, especially those analyzing the specific risk factors for complications in robotic surgery, should be conducted in order to optimize the stratification of patients eligible for robotic surgery.
| S-EPMC7347827 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is widely recognized as an effective treatment for end-stage knee osteoarthritis (OA). Compared with conventional TKA, robotic-arm assisted TKA may improve patients’ functionality and resulting quality of life by more accurate and precise component placement. Currently, the literature on cost-effectiveness of robotic-arm assisted TKA in the US is limited. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of robotic-arm assisted TKA relative to TKA in the Medicare-aged population including exploring the impact of hospital volume on cost-effectiveness outcomes. Methods We developed a decision-analytic model to evaluate the costs, health outcomes, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of robotic-arm assisted TKA vs TKA in Medicare population with OA. We evaluated cost-effectiveness at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). We sourced costs from the literature including episode-of-care (EOC) costs from a Medicare study. We assessed cost-effectiveness of robotic-arm assisted TKA by hospital procedure volume and conducted deterministic (DSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA). Results For the average patient treated in a hospital with an annual volume of 50 procedures, robotic-arm assisted TKA resulted in a total QALY of 6.18 relative to 6.17 under conventional TKA. Total discounted costs per patient were $32,535 and $31,917 for robotic-arm assisted TKA and conventional TKA, respectively. Robotic-arm assisted TKA was cost-effective in the base case with an ICER of $41,331/QALY. In univariate DSA, cost-effectiveness outcomes were most sensitive to the annual hospital procedure volume. Robotic-arm assisted TKA was cost-effective at a WTP of $50,000/QALY only when hospital volume exceeded 49 procedures per year. In PSA, robotic-arm assisted TKA was cost-effective at a $50,000/QALY WTP threshold in 50.4% of 10,000 simulations. Conclusions Despite high robotic purchase costs, robotic-arm assisted TKA is likely to be cost-effective relative to TKA in the Medicare population with knee OA in high-volume hospitals through lowering revision rates and decreasing post-acute care costs. Higher-volume hospitals may deliver higher value in performing in robotic-arm assisted TKA.
| S-EPMC9704609 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Minimally invasive adrenalectomy may be associated with reduction in postoperative pain, morbidity, and length of stay and, as a result, has become a preferred approach for many adrenal tumors. Left-sided adrenal tumors, however, are particularly challenging to address in the morbidly obese patient due to difficulties in maintaining exposure and dissection. The robotic platform offers instruments with greater degrees of freedom that aid in retraction and dissection, especially of the adrenal vein, but fixed patient positioning and the large distance needed between patient ports to avoid arm collisions can be restrictive in patients with a large amount of retroperitoneal fat and small working space.We demonstrate robotic left adrenalectomy (RLA) in a consecutive series of patients with a mean weight of 99 kg and mean BMI of 36. Techniques to safely and efficiently perform RLA in obese patients are stepwise demonstrated, including (1) Patient positioning, (2) Management of the pannus, (3) Customized port placement, (4) Medial retraction of the pancreas, (5) Finding the left adrenal vein, and (6) Management of bleeding. Intraoperative videos from multiple patients also show surgical pitfalls, examples of poor port placement, arm collisions, alternative approaches to the vein, and techniques to control unexpected bleeding. All patients in the series underwent successful RLA with negative margins, no major intra- or postoperative complications, and discharge on POD 1-2.Though poor exposure due to patient body habitus is a relative contraindication, even large left-sided adrenal tumors can be safely approached robotically while adhering to oncologic principles, as is demonstrated in this video.
| S-EPMC5219870 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of transoral robotic surgery (TORS) for the diagnosis and treatment of cervical unknown primary squamous cell carcinoma (CUP). STUDY DESIGN:Case series with chart review. SETTING:Tertiary academic hospital. SUBJECTS AND METHODS:A retrospective chart review was performed on patients with new occult primary squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck with nondiagnostic imaging and/or endoscopy who were treated with TORS at a tertiary hospital between 2009 and 2012. Direct costs were obtained from the hospital's billing system, and national data were used for inpatient hospital costs and physician fees. The proportion of tumors found in 3 strategies was used as effectiveness to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS:In total, 206 head and neck robotic cases were performed at our institution between December 2009 and December 2012. Three surgeons performed TORS on 22 patients for occult primary squamous cell carcinoma. The primary tumor was located in 19 of 22 patients (86.4%). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for sequential and simultaneous examination under anesthesia with tonsillectomy (EUA) and TORS base of tongue resection was $8619 and $5774 per additional primary identified, respectively. CONCLUSION:Sequential EUA followed by TORS is associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $8619 compared with traditional EUA alone. Bilateral base of tongue resection should be considered in the workup of these patients, particularly if the palatine tonsils have already been removed.
| S-EPMC4167971 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe cost-effectiveness of different surgical techniques for radical prostatectomy remains a subject of debate. Emergence of recent critical clinical data and changes in surgical equipment costs due to their shared use by different clinical specialties necessitate an updated cost-effectiveness analysis in a centralized, largely government-funded health care system such as the UK National Health Service (NHS).ObjectiveTo compare robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) with open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and laparoscopic-assisted radical prostatectomy (LRP) using contemporary data on clinical outcomes, costs, and surgical volumes in the UK.Design, setting, and participantsThis economic analysis used a Markov model developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of RARP, LRP, and ORP to treat localized prostate cancer. The model was constructed from the perspective of the UK NHS. The model simulated 65-year-old men who underwent radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer and were followed up for a 10-year period. Data were analyzed from May 1, 2020, to July 31, 2021.ExposuresRobotic-assisted radical prostatectomy, LRP, and ORP.Main outcomes and measuresQuality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs (direct medical costs and costs outside the NHS), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).ResultsCompared with LRP, RARP cost £1785 (US $2350) less and had 0.24 more QALYs gained; thus, RARP was a dominant option compared with LRP. Compared with ORP, RARP had 0.12 more QALYs gained but cost £526 (US $693) more during the 10-year time frame, resulting in an ICER of £4293 (US $5653)/QALY. Because the ICER was below the £30 000 (US $39 503) willingness-to-pay threshold, RARP was more cost-effective than ORP in the UK. The most sensitive variable influencing the cost-effectiveness of RARP was the lower risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR). Scenario analysis indicated RARP would remain more cost-effective than ORP as long as the BCR hazard ratios comparing RARP vs ORP were less than 0.99.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that in the UK, RARP has an ICER lower than the willingness-to-pay threshold and thus is likely a cost-effective surgical treatment option for patients with localized prostate cancer compared with ORP and LRP. The results were mainly driven by the lower risk of BCR for RARP. These findings may differ in other health care settings where different thresholds and costs may apply.
| S-EPMC8980901 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionRobotic-assisted knee replacement systems have been introduced to healthcare services worldwide in an effort to improve clinical outcomes for people, although high-quality evidence that they are clinically, or cost-effective remains sparse. Robotic-arm systems may improve surgical accuracy and could contribute to reduced pain, improved function and lower overall cost of total knee replacement (TKR) surgery. However, TKR with conventional instruments may be just as effective and may be quicker and cheaper. There is a need for a robust evaluation of this technology, including cost-effectiveness analyses using both within-trial and modelling approaches. This trial will compare robotic-assisted against conventional TKR to provide high-quality evidence on whether robotic-assisted knee replacement is beneficial to patients and cost-effective for healthcare systems.Methods and analysisThe Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and cost Effectiveness Randomised controlled trial-Knee is a multicentre, participant-assessor blinded, randomised controlled trial to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted TKR compared with TKR using conventional instruments. A total of 332 participants will be randomised (1:1) to provide 90% power for a 12-point difference in the primary outcome measure; the Forgotten Joint Score at 12 months postrandomisation. Allocation concealment will be achieved using computer-based randomisation performed on the day of surgery and methods for blinding will include sham incisions for marker clusters and blinded operation notes. The primary analysis will adhere to the intention-to-treat principle. Results will be reported in line with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. A parallel study will collect data on the learning effects associated with robotic-arm systems.Ethics and disseminationThe trial has been approved by an ethics committee for patient participation (East Midlands-Nottingham 2 Research Ethics Committee, 29 July 2020. NRES number: 20/EM/0159). All results from the study will be disseminated using peer-reviewed publications, presentations at international conferences, lay summaries and social media as appropriate.Trial registration numberISRCTN27624068.
| S-EPMC10277111 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesReview and assess cost-effectiveness studies of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) for localised prostate cancer compared with open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP).DesignSystematic review.SettingPubMed, Embase, Scopus, International HTA database, the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination database and various HTA websites were searched (January 2005 to March 2021) to identify the eligible cost-effectiveness studies.ParticipantsCost-effectiveness, cost-utility, or cost-minimization analyses examining RARP versus ORP or LRP were included in this systematic review.InterventionsDifferent surgical approaches to treat localized prostate cancer: RARP compared with ORP and LRP.Primary and secondary outcome measuresA structured narrative synthesis was developed to summarize results of cost, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness results (eg, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]). Study quality was assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria Extended checklist. Application of medical device features were evaluated.ResultsTwelve studies met inclusion criteria, 11 of which were cost-utility analyses. Higher quality-adjusted life-years and higher costs were observed with RARP compared with ORP or LRP in 11 studies (91%). Among four studies comparing RARP with LRP, three reported RARP was dominant or cost-effective. Among ten studies comparing RARP with ORP, RARP was more cost-effective in five, not cost-effective in two, and inconclusive in three studies. Studies with longer time horizons tended to report favorable cost-effectiveness results for RARP. Nine studies (75%) were rated of moderate or good quality. Recommended medical device features were addressed to varying degrees within the literature as follows: capital investment included in most studies, dynamic pricing considered in about half, and learning curve and incremental innovation were poorly addressed.ConclusionsDespite study heterogeneity, RARP was more costly and effective compared with ORP and LRP in most studies and likely to be more cost-effective, particularly over a multiple year or lifetime time horizon. Further cost-effectiveness analyses for RARP that more thoroughly consider medical device features and use an appropriate time horizon are needed.Prospero registration numberCRD42021246811.
| S-EPMC9490571 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Lifetime risk of developing colorectal cancer is 5%, and 5-year survival at early stage is 92%. Individuals with precancerous lesions removed at primary screening are typically recommended surveillance colonoscopy. Because greater benefits are anticipated for those with higher risk of colorectal cancer, scope for risk-specific surveillance recommendations exists. This review assesses published cost-effectiveness estimates of postpolypectomy surveillance to consider the potential for personalized recommendations by risk group. Meta-analyses of incidence of advanced neoplasia postpolypectomy for low-risk cases were comparable to those without adenoma, with both rates under the lifetime risk of 5%. This group may not benefit from intensive surveillance, which risks unnecessary harm and inefficient use of often scarce colonoscopy capacity. Therefore, greater personalization through deintensified strategies for low-risk individuals could be beneficial. The potential for noninvasive testing, such as fecal immunochemical tests, combined with primary prevention or chemoprevention may reserve colonoscopy for targeted use in personalized risk-stratified surveillance. This review appraised evidence supporting a program of personalized surveillance in patients with colorectal adenoma according to risk group and compared the effectiveness of surveillance colonoscopy with alternative prevention strategies. It assessed trade-offs among costs, benefits, and adverse effects that must be considered in a decision to adopt or reject personalized surveillance.
| S-EPMC5858033 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:With increased utilization of robotic technology, robotic adrenalectomy (RA) became popular in certain high-volume centers as an alternative to conventional laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA). The aim of the present study was to evaluate clinical and surgical outcomes of RA in two high-volume centers in Turkey. Methods:Between 2012 and 2019, consecutive patients who underwent robotic transperitoneal adrenalectomy in two referral centers for surgical endocrine diseases in Turkey were analyzed retrospectively. Results:A total of 111 patients were analyzed. Mean diameter of the tumor in preoperative imaging was 38.6±2.0 mm. Total operation time was 135.4±47.9 min. The analysis of the learning curve period and the post-learning curve period in both centers demonstrated that the total surgery time decreased from 152.68±48.6 to 118.8±37.1 min, and the console time decreased from 113.2±38.9 to 81.6±35.1 min (P<0.0001). In 8 patients, complications arose during the surgery and postoperative complications were observed in 10 patients. Intraoperative complication rate was 28% in patients with a tumor diameter of greater than 50 mm (P<0.0001). There was no mortality. Conclusions:Our study demonstrated that RA is a safe and effective procedure with low-morbidity and without mortality in high number of cases.
| S-EPMC7347805 | biostudies-literature