Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: a prospective trial-based economic evaluation

被引:7
|
作者
Lu, Jun [1 ,2 ]
Wu, Dong [1 ,2 ]
Huang, Jiao-bao [1 ,2 ]
Lin, Jia [1 ,2 ]
Xu, Bin-bin [1 ,2 ]
Xue, Zhen [1 ,2 ]
Zheng, Hua-Long [1 ,2 ]
Lin, Guo-sheng [1 ,2 ]
Shen, Li-li [1 ,2 ]
Li, Ping [1 ,2 ]
Wang, Jia-Bin [1 ,2 ]
Lin, Jian-Xian [1 ,2 ]
Chen, Qi-Yue [1 ,2 ]
Cao, Long-Long [1 ,2 ]
Xie, Jian-Wei [1 ,2 ]
Zheng, Chao-Hui [1 ,2 ]
Huang, Chang-Ming [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Fujian Med Univ, Union Hosp, Dept Gastr Surg, 29 Xinquan Rd, Fuzhou 350001, Fujian, Peoples R China
[2] Fujian Med Univ, Union Hosp, Dept Gen Surg, Fuzhou, Peoples R China
关键词
Robotic; Cost-effectiveness; Gastrectomy; Gastric cancer; OF-LIFE OUTCOMES; LYMPH-NODE DISSECTION; COST-EFFECTIVENESS; SURGERY; COMPLICATIONS; SURVIVAL;
D O I
10.1007/s00464-023-10147-1
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
ImportanceIt is largely unclear whether robotic distal gastrectomy (RDG) is cost-effective for locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC).ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of RDG, laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG), and open distal gastrectomy (ODG) for patients with LAGC.Design, setting, and participantsInverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance baseline characteristics. A decision-analytic model was constructed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of RDG, LDG, and ODG.ExposuresRDG, LDG, and ODG.Main outcomes and measuresIncremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life year (QALY).ResultsThis pooled analysis of two randomized controlled trials included 449 patients: 117, 254, and 78 patients in the RDG, LDG, and ODG groups, respectively. After IPTW, RDG demonstrated its priority in terms of less blood loss, postoperative length, and complication rate (all P < 0.05). RDG also showed higher QOL with more cost, representing an ICER of $85,739.73 per QALY and $42,189.53 per QALY compared to LDG and ODG, respectively. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, RDG achieved the best cost-effectiveness for patients with LAGC only when the willingness-to-pay threshold was > $85,739.73 per QALY, which significantly exceeded 3 times Chinese per capita GDP. Furthermore, one of the most important factors was the indirect costs of robotic surgery in terms of the cost-effectiveness of RDG compared to that of LDG or ODG.Conclusions and relevanceAlthough improved short-term outcomes and QOL were seen in patients underwent RDG, the economic burden should be considered in the clinical decision-making regarding robotic surgery use for patients with LAGC. Our findings may vary in different health care settings and affordability.Trial registration CLASS-01 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, CT01609309) and FUGES-011 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03313700).
引用
收藏
页码:7472 / 7485
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: a prospective trial-based economic evaluation
    Jun Lu
    Dong Wu
    Jiao-bao Huang
    Jia Lin
    Bin-bin Xu
    Zhen Xue
    Hua-Long Zheng
    Guo-sheng Lin
    Li-li Shen
    Ping Li
    Jia-Bin Wang
    Jian-Xian Lin
    Qi-Yue Chen
    Long-Long Cao
    Jian-Wei Xie
    Chao-Hui Zheng
    Chang-Ming Huang
    Surgical Endoscopy, 2023, 37 : 7472 - 7485
  • [2] Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer
    Pan, Hua-Feng
    Wang, Gang
    Liu, Jiang
    Liu, Xin-Xin
    Zhao, Kun
    Tang, Xiao-Fei
    Jiang, Zhi-Wei
    SURGICAL LAPAROSCOPY ENDOSCOPY & PERCUTANEOUS TECHNIQUES, 2017, 27 (06): : 428 - 433
  • [3] Robotic versus laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer
    Kakiashvili, I.
    Brauner, E.
    Ben Yshai, O.
    Almog, R.
    Beny, A.
    Kluger, Y.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2015, 51 : S425 - S426
  • [4] Laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy versus open distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer
    Sang Il Hwang
    Hyung Ook Kim
    Chang Hak Yoo
    Jun Ho Shin
    Byung Ho Son
    Surgical Endoscopy, 2009, 23 : 1252 - 1258
  • [5] Laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy versus open distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer
    Hwang, Sang Il
    Kim, Hyung Ook
    Yoo, Chang Hak
    Shin, Jun Ho
    Son, Byung Ho
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2009, 23 (06): : 1252 - 1258
  • [6] Laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: A case-control study
    Scatizzi M.
    Kröning K.C.
    Lenzi E.
    Moraldi L.
    Cantafio S.
    Feroci F.
    Updates in Surgery, 2011, 63 (1) : 17 - 23
  • [7] Assessment of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer A Randomized Controlled Trial
    Lu, Jun
    Zheng, Chao-Hui
    Xu, Bin-Bin
    Xie, Jian-Wei
    Wang, Jia-Bin
    Lin, Jian-Xian
    Chen, Qi-Yue
    Cao, Long-Long
    Lin, Mi
    Tu, Ru-Hong
    Huang, Ze-Ning
    Lin, Ju-Li
    Zheng, Hua-Long
    Huang, Chang-Ming
    Li, Ping
    ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2021, 273 (05) : 858 - 867
  • [8] Assessment of robotic versus laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A randomized controlled trial
    Lu, J.
    Wu, D.
    Wang, H-G.
    Zheng, C-H.
    Li, P.
    Xie, J-W.
    Wang, J-B.
    Lin, J-X.
    Chen, Q-Y.
    Cao, L-L.
    Lin, M.
    Tu, R-H.
    Huang, Z-N.
    Lin, J-L.
    Zheng, H-L.
    Huang, C.
    ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY, 2020, 31 : S1287 - S1287
  • [9] Comparison of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer
    Li, Bofei
    Wong, Ian Yu-Hong
    Chan, Fion Siu-Yin
    Chan, Kwan Kit
    Wong, Claudia Lai-Yin
    Law, Tsz-Ting
    Kwok, Jeanette Yat-Yin
    Law, Simon
    SURGICAL ONCOLOGY-OXFORD, 2020, 35 : 14 - 21
  • [10] Robotic versus laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for resectable gastric cancer: a randomized phase 2 trial
    Lu, Jun
    Xu, Bin-bin
    Zheng, Hua-Long
    Li, Ping
    Xie, Jian-wei
    Wang, Jia-bin
    Lin, Jian-xian
    Chen, Qi-yue
    Cao, Long-long
    Lin, Mi
    Tu, Ru-hong
    Huang, Ze-ning
    Lin, Ju-li
    Yao, Zi-hao
    Zheng, Chao-Hui
    Huang, Chang-Ming
    NATURE COMMUNICATIONS, 2024, 15 (01)