Evaluating the economic efficiency of open, laparoscopic, and robotic distal pancreatectomy: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis

被引:1
|
作者
Koh, Ye Xin [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Zhao, Yun [5 ]
Tan, Ivan En-Howe [2 ,5 ]
Tan, Hwee Leong [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Chua, Darren Weiquan [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Loh, Wei-Liang [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Tan, Ek Khoon [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Teo, Jin Yao [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Au, Marianne Kit Har [5 ,6 ,7 ]
Goh, Brian Kim Poh [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Singapore Gen Hosp, Dept Hepatopancreatobiliary & Transplant Surg, Academia, 20 Coll Rd, Singapore 169856, Singapore
[2] Academia, Natl Canc Ctr Singapore, 20 Coll Rd, Singapore 169856, Singapore
[3] Duke Natl Univ Singapore, Med Sch, Singapore, Singapore
[4] SingHealth Duke Natl Univ Singapore, Liver Transplant Serv, Transplant Ctr, Singapore, Singapore
[5] Singapore Hlth Serv, Grp Finance Analyt, Singapore 168582, Singapore
[6] Singhlth Community Hosp, Finance, Singapore 168582, Singapore
[7] Singapore Hlth Serv, Finance Reg Hlth Syst & Strateg Finance, Singapore 168582, Singapore
关键词
Distal pancreatectomy; Minimally invasive surgery; Robotic; Laparoscopic; Cost-effectiveness; Network meta-analysis; COST-EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL-OUTCOMES; SINGLE-CENTER; RESECTION; EXPERIENCE; FISTULA; SURGERY; BIAS;
D O I
10.1007/s00464-024-10889-6
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
BackgroundThis study compared the cost-effectiveness of open (ODP), laparoscopic (LDP), and robotic (RDP) distal pancreatectomy (DP).MethodsStudies reporting the costs of DP were included in a literature search until August 2023. Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted, and surface under cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) values, mean difference (MD), odds ratio (OR), and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were calculated for outcomes of interest. Cluster analysis was performed to examine the similarity and classification of DP approaches into homogeneous clusters. A decision model-based cost-utility analysis was conducted for the cost-effectiveness analysis of DP strategies.ResultsTwenty-six studies with 29,164 patients were included in the analysis. Among the three groups, LDP had the lowest overall costs, while ODP had the highest overall costs (LDP vs. ODP: MD - 3521.36, 95% CrI - 6172.91 to - 1228.59). RDP had the highest procedural costs (ODP vs. RDP: MD - 4311.15, 95% CrI - 6005.40 to - 2599.16; LDP vs. RDP: MD - 3772.25, 95% CrI - 4989.50 to - 2535.16), but incurred the lowest hospitalization costs. Both LDP (MD - 3663.82, 95% CrI - 6906.52 to - 747.69) and RDP (MD - 6678.42, 95% CrI - 11,434.30 to - 2972.89) had significantly reduced hospitalization costs compared to ODP. LDP and RDP demonstrated a superior profile regarding costs-morbidity, costs-mortality, costs-efficacy, and costs-utility compared to ODP. Compared to ODP, LDP and RDP cost $3110 and $817 less per patient, resulting in 0.03 and 0.05 additional quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), respectively, with positive incremental net monetary benefit (NMB). RDP costs $2293 more than LDP with a negative incremental NMB but generates 0.02 additional QALYs with improved postoperative morbidity and spleen preservation. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggests that LDP and RDP are more cost-effective options compared to ODP at various willingness-to-pay thresholds.ConclusionLDP and RDP are more cost-effective than ODP, with LDP exhibiting better cost savings and RDP demonstrating superior surgical outcomes and improved QALYs.
引用
收藏
页码:3035 / 3051
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Robotic, laparoscopic and open surgery for gallbladder cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
    Chee, Madeline Yen Min
    Wu, Andrew Guan Ru
    Fong, Khi-Yung
    Yew, Ashley
    Koh, Ye Xin
    Goh, Brian K. P.
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2024, 38 (09): : 4846 - 4857
  • [32] A comparison between robotic, laparoscopic and open hepatectomy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis
    Gavriilidis, Paschalis
    Roberts, Keith J.
    Aldrighetti, Luca
    Sutcliffe, Robert P.
    [J]. EJSO, 2020, 46 (07): : 1214 - 1224
  • [33] A meta-analysis of robotic-assisted pancreatectomy versus laparoscopic and open pancreatectomy
    Chen, Yigang
    Yan, Jun
    Yuan, Ziming
    Yu, Song
    Wang, Zhigang
    Zheng, Qi
    [J]. SAUDI MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2013, 34 (12) : 1229 - 1236
  • [34] Robotic central pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Rompianesi, Gianluca
    Montalti, Roberto
    Giglio, Mariano C.
    Caruso, Emanuele
    Ceresa, Carlo DL.
    Troisi, Roberto I.
    [J]. HPB, 2022, 24 (02) : 143 - 151
  • [35] Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis
    Solaini, Leonardo
    Bazzocchi, Francesca
    Cavaliere, Davide
    Avanzolini, Andrea
    Cucchetti, Alessandro
    Ercolani, Giorgio
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2018, 32 (03): : 1104 - 1110
  • [36] Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Laparoscopic Versus Open Distal Gastrectomy
    Cheng, Qiuye
    Pang, Tony C. Y.
    Hollands, Michael J.
    Richardson, Arthur J.
    Pleass, Henry
    Johnston, Emma S.
    Lam, Vincent W. T.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY, 2014, 18 (06) : 1087 - 1099
  • [37] Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis
    Leonardo Solaini
    Francesca Bazzocchi
    Davide Cavaliere
    Andrea Avanzolini
    Alessandro Cucchetti
    Giorgio Ercolani
    [J]. Surgical Endoscopy, 2018, 32 : 1104 - 1110
  • [38] Advantages of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and matched studies
    Cucchetti, Alessandro
    Bocchino, Antonio
    Crippa, Stefano
    Solaini, Leonardo
    Partelli, Stefano
    Falconi, Massimo
    Ercolani, Giorgio
    [J]. SURGERY, 2023, 173 (04) : 1023 - 1029
  • [39] Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Laparoscopic Versus Open Distal Gastrectomy
    Qiuye Cheng
    Tony C. Y. Pang
    Michael J. Hollands
    Arthur J. Richardson
    Henry Pleass
    Emma S. Johnston
    Vincent W. T. Lam
    [J]. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2014, 18 : 1087 - 1099
  • [40] Comparing robotic, laparoscopic and open cystectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Fonseka, Thomas
    Ahmed, Kamran
    Froghi, Saied
    Khan, Shahid A.
    Dasgupta, Prokar
    Khan, Mohammad Shamim
    [J]. ARCHIVIO ITALIANO DI UROLOGIA E ANDROLOGIA, 2015, 87 (01) : 41 - 48