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
. 2022 Dec;16(6):1441-1450.
doi: 10.1007/s11701-022-01377-x. Epub 2022 Feb 28.

Is robotic lobectomy cheaper? A micro-cost analysis

Affiliations

Is robotic lobectomy cheaper? A micro-cost analysis

Ben Shanahan et al. J Robot Surg. 2022 Dec.

Abstract

Higher capital costs and operating room costs associated with Lobectomy via Robot Assisted Thoracic Surgery (RATS) have previously been suggested as the principal contributors to the elevated overall cost. This study uses a micro-costing approach to a previous analysis of clinical outcomes of RATS, Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery (VATS) and Open Lobectomy to evaluate the most significant cost drivers for the higher cost of robot-assisted lobectomy. A micro-costing model was developed to reflect the pathway of patients from day of surgery through the first 30 days following lobectomy. Costs were provided for RATS, VATS and Open approaches. Sensitivity analysis was performed specifically in the area of staff costs. A threshold sensitivity analysis of the overall cost components was also performed. Total cost per case for the RATS approach was €13,321 for the VATS approach €11,567, and for the Open approach €12,582. The overall cost differences were driven primarily by the elevated consumable costs associated with RATS Lobectomy. Capital costs account for a relatively small proportion of the per-case cost difference. This study presents a detailed analysis of the cost drivers for lobectomy, modelled for the three primary surgical approaches. We believe this is a useful tool for surgeons, hospital management, and service commissioning agencies to accurately and comprehensively determine where cost savings can be applied in their programme to improve the cost-effectiveness of RATS lobectomy.

Keywords: Cost analysis; Healthcare economics; Lobectomy; Robotic surgery; Thoracic surgery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Usha Kreaden is an employee of Intuitive Surgical.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Robotic-assisted lung lobectomy flowchart (Search dates 1/1/2010–1/9/2020)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Case costs by cost driver and overall

References

    1. Barta JA, Powell CA, Wisnivesky JP. Global epidemiology of lung cancer. Ann Glob Health. 2019;85(1):8. doi: 10.5334/aogh.2419. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Yu JB, Soulos PR, Cramer LD, Decker RH, Kim AW, Gross CP. Comparative effectiveness of surgery and radiosurgery for stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer. 2015;121(14):2341–2349. doi: 10.1002/cncr.29359. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Agostini P, Lugg ST, Adams K, Vartsaba N, Kalkat MS, Rajesh PB, et al. Postoperative pulmonary complications and rehabilitation requirements following lobectomy: a propensity score matched study of patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus thoracotomydagger. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2017;24(6):931–937. doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivx002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Falcoz PE, Puyraveau M, Thomas PA, Decaluwe H, Hurtgen M, Petersen RH, et al. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus open lobectomy for primary non-small-cell lung cancer: a propensity-matched analysis of outcome from the European society of thoracic surgeon database. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2016;49(2):602–609. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezv154. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kuritzky AM, Ryder BA, Ng T. Long-term survival outcomes of video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) lobectomy after transitioning from open lobectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(8):2734–2740. doi: 10.1245/s10434-013-2929-2. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources