Cost‐effectiveness analysis of robot‐assisted vs. open partial nephrectomy

Background The cost‐effectiveness of robot‐assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) vs. the open procedure is not established. Methods We estimated in‐hospital complications and the cost of RAPN vs. open partial nephrectomy (OPN) using an economic model. Costs incurred both intraoperatively and in hospit...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery 2018-08, Vol.14 (4), p.e1920-n/a
Hauptverfasser: Buse, Stephan, Hach, Carolin E., Klumpen, Phillip, Schmitz, Karoline, Mager, Rene, Mottrie, Alexandre, Haferkamp, Axel
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background The cost‐effectiveness of robot‐assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) vs. the open procedure is not established. Methods We estimated in‐hospital complications and the cost of RAPN vs. open partial nephrectomy (OPN) using an economic model. Costs incurred both intraoperatively and in hospital were considered. US data were extracted from existing literature. Results Mean in‐hospital costs were $14,824 (95% CI $13,368–$16,898) for RAPN and $15,094 (95% CI $13,491–$17,140) for OPN. Complications after RAPN occurred in 23.3% (95% CI 20.0–25.8%) and after OPN in 36.1% (95% CI 35.6–36.6%) of the patients. In a sensitivity analysis, limited centre experience was associated with relevant increase in RAPN cost and consequently in low cost‐effectiveness. Conclusions In this economic model based on US data, RAPN resulted in nominally lower cost but fewer perioperative complications than OPN. RAPN was not cost‐effective in less experienced centres.
ISSN:1478-5951
1478-596X
DOI:10.1002/rcs.1920