Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2020 Apr;16(2):e2080.
doi: 10.1002/rcs.2080. Epub 2020 Feb 11.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy

Emilio Vicente  1 , Javier Núñez-Alfonsel  2 , Benedetto Ielpo  1 , Valentina Ferri  1 , Riccardo Caruso  1 , Hipolito Duran  1 , Eduardo Diaz  1 , Luis Malave  1 , Isabel Fabra  1 , Eva Pinna  1 , Roberta Isernia  1 , Alvaro Hidalgo  3 , Yolanda Quijano  1
Affiliations
Observational Study

A cost-effectiveness analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy

Emilio Vicente et al. Int J Med Robot. 2020 Apr.

Abstract

Aim: There is no study in the literature that evaluates the cost-effectiveness of robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) over laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP). We performed a comparative study of RDP and LDP with the aim of evaluating clinical and cost-effective outcomes.

Material and methods: This is an observational, comparative prospective nonrandomized study. The primary end point was to compare the cost-effectiveness differences between both groups. A willingness to pay of €20 000 and €30 000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was used as a threshold to recognize which treatment was most cost-effective.

Results: A total of 31 RDP and 28 LDP have been included. The overall mean total cost was similar in both groups (RDP: €9712.15 versus LDP: €9424.68; P > .5). Mean QALYs for RDP (0.652) was higher than that associated with LDP (0.59) (P > .5).

Conclusion: This study seems to provide data of cost-effectiveness between RDP and LDP approaches, showing some benefits for RDP.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Asbun HJ, Stauffer JA. Laparoscopic vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy: overall outcomes and severity of complications using the accordion severity grading system. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;215(6):810-819.
    1. Duran H, Ielpo B, Caruso R, et al. Does robotic distal pancreatectomy surgery offer similar results as laparoscopic and open approach? A comparative study from a single medical center. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg. 2014;10:280-285.
    1. Lee SY, Allen PJ, Sadot E, et al. Distal pancreatectomy: a single institution's experience in open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;220:18-27.
    1. Hanna EM, Rozario N, Rupp C, Sindram D, Iannitti DA, Martinie JB. Robotic hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: lessons learned and predictors for conversion. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg. 2013;9:152-159.
    1. Daouadi M, Zureikat AH, Zenati MS, et al. Robot-assisted minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is superior to the laparoscopic technique. Ann Surg. 2013;257:128-132.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources