1
|
De Pastena M, Esposito A, Paiella S, Montagnini G, Zingaretti CC, Ramera M, Azzolina D, Gregori D, Kauffmann EF, Giardino A, Moraldi L, Butturini G, Boggi U, Salvia R. Nationwide cost-effectiveness and quality of life analysis of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy. Surg Endosc 2024:10.1007/s00464-024-10849-0. [PMID: 39164438 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-10849-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2024] [Accepted: 04/08/2024] [Indexed: 08/22/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study analyzed the Quality of Life (QoL) and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic (LDP) versus robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP). METHODS Consecutive patients submitted to LDP or RDP from 2010 to 2020 in four high-volume Italian centers were included, with a minimum of 12 months of postoperative follow-up were included. QoL was evaluated using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D questionnaires, self-reported by patients. After a propensity score matching, which included BMI, gender, operation time, multiorgan and vascular resections, splenic preservation, and pancreatic stump management, the mean differential cost and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY) were calculated and plotted on a cost-utility plane. RESULTS The study population consisted of 564 patients. Among these, 271 (49%) patients were submitted to LDP, while 293 (51%) patients to RDP. After propensity score matching, the study population was composed of 159 patients in each group, with a median follow-up of 59 months. As regards the QoL analysis, global health and emotional functioning domains showed better results in the RDP group (p = 0.037 and p = 0.026, respectively), whereas the other did not differ. As expected, the median crude costs analysis confirmed that RDP was more expensive than LDP (16,041 Euros vs. 10,335 Euros, p < 0.001). However, the robotic approach had a higher probability of being more cost-effective than the laparoscopic procedure when a willingness to pay more than 5697 Euros/QALY was accepted. CONCLUSION RDP was associated with better QoL as explored by specific domains. Crude costs were higher for RDP, and the cost-effectiveness threshold was set at 5697 euros/QALY.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matteo De Pastena
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Department, Pancreas Institute, University and Hospital Trust of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Alessandro Esposito
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Department, Pancreas Institute, University and Hospital Trust of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Salvatore Paiella
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Department, Pancreas Institute, University and Hospital Trust of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Greta Montagnini
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Department, Pancreas Institute, University and Hospital Trust of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Caterina C Zingaretti
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Department, Pancreas Institute, University and Hospital Trust of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Marco Ramera
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Department, Pancreas Institute, University and Hospital Trust of Verona, Verona, Italy
- Department of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - Danila Azzolina
- Department of Environmental and Preventive Science, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
| | - Dario Gregori
- Unit of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Public Health, Department of Cardiac, Thoracic, and Vascular Sciences, University of Padova, Padova, Italy
| | - Emanuele F Kauffmann
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| | | | - Luca Moraldi
- Division of Oncologic Surgery and Robotics, Department of Oncology, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
| | - Giovanni Butturini
- HPB Surgery Unit, Pederzoli Hospital, Peschiera del Garda, Verona, Italy
| | - Ugo Boggi
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| | - Roberto Salvia
- University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
- Unit of General and Pancreatic Surgery - The Pancreas Institute Verona, Department of Engineering for Innovation Medecine, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Koh YX, Zhao Y, Tan IEH, Tan HL, Chua DW, Loh WL, Tan EK, Teo JY, Au MKH, Goh BKP. Comparative cost-effectiveness of open, laparoscopic, and robotic liver resection: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Surgery 2024; 176:11-23. [PMID: 38782702 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2024.04.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/08/2024] [Revised: 03/25/2024] [Accepted: 04/11/2024] [Indexed: 05/25/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of open, laparoscopic, and robotic liver resection. METHODS A comprehensive literature review and Bayesian network meta-analysis were conducted. Surface under cumulative ranking area values, mean difference, odds ratio, and 95% credible intervals were calculated for all outcomes. Cluster analysis was performed to determine the most cost-effective clustering approach. Costs-morbidity, costs-mortality, and costs-efficacy were the primary outcomes assessed, with postoperative overall morbidity, mortality, and length of stay associated with total costs for open, laparoscopic, and robotic liver resection. RESULTS Laparoscopic liver resection incurred the lowest total costs (laparoscopic liver resection versus open liver resection: mean difference -2,529.84, 95% credible intervals -4,192.69 to -884.83; laparoscopic liver resection versus robotic liver resection: mean difference -3,363.37, 95% credible intervals -5,629.24 to -1,119.38). Open liver resection had the lowest procedural costs but incurred the highest hospitalization costs compared to laparoscopic liver resection and robotic liver resection. Conversely, robotic liver resection had the highest total and procedural costs but the lowest hospitalization costs. Robotic liver resection and laparoscopic liver resection had a significantly reduced length of stay than open liver resection and showed less postoperative morbidity. Laparoscopic liver resection resulted in the lowest readmission and liver-specific complication rates. Laparoscopic liver resection and robotic liver resection demonstrated advantages in costs-morbidity efficiency. While robotic liver resection offered notable benefits in mortality and length of stay, these were balanced against its highest total costs, presenting a nuanced trade-off in the costs-mortality and costs-efficacy analyses. CONCLUSION Laparoscopic liver resection represents a more cost-effective option for hepatectomy with superior postoperative outcomes and shorter length of stay than open liver resection. Robotic liver resection, though costlier than laparoscopic liver resection, along with laparoscopic liver resection, consistently exceeds open liver resection in surgical performance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ye Xin Koh
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore; Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore; Liver Transplant Service, SingHealth Duke-National University of Singapore Transplant Centre, Singapore.
| | - Yun Zhao
- Group Finance Analytics, Singapore Health Services, Singapore
| | | | - Hwee Leong Tan
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore; Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore
| | - Darren Weiquan Chua
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore; Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore; Liver Transplant Service, SingHealth Duke-National University of Singapore Transplant Centre, Singapore
| | - Wei-Liang Loh
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore; Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore
| | - Ek Khoon Tan
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore; Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore; Liver Transplant Service, SingHealth Duke-National University of Singapore Transplant Centre, Singapore
| | - Jin Yao Teo
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore; Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore
| | - Marianne Kit Har Au
- Group Finance Analytics, Singapore Health Services, Singapore; Finance, SingHealth Community Hospitals, Singapore; Finance, Regional Health System & Strategic Finance, Singapore Health Services, Singapore
| | - Brian Kim Poh Goh
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore; Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore; Liver Transplant Service, SingHealth Duke-National University of Singapore Transplant Centre, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Koh YX, Zhao Y, Tan IEH, Tan HL, Chua DW, Loh WL, Tan EK, Teo JY, Au MKH, Goh BKP. Evaluating the economic efficiency of open, laparoscopic, and robotic distal pancreatectomy: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 2024; 38:3035-3051. [PMID: 38777892 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-10889-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2023] [Accepted: 04/29/2024] [Indexed: 05/25/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study compared the cost-effectiveness of open (ODP), laparoscopic (LDP), and robotic (RDP) distal pancreatectomy (DP). METHODS Studies 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. RESULTS Twenty-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. CONCLUSION LDP and RDP are more cost-effective than ODP, with LDP exhibiting better cost savings and RDP demonstrating superior surgical outcomes and improved QALYs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ye Xin Koh
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Academia, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore.
- Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore, Singapore.
- Liver Transplant Service, SingHealth Duke-National University of Singapore Transplant Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
| | - Yun Zhao
- Group Finance Analytics, Singapore Health Services, Singapore, 168582, Singapore
| | - Ivan En-Howe Tan
- Group Finance Analytics, Singapore Health Services, Singapore, 168582, Singapore
| | - Hwee Leong Tan
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Academia, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore
- Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Darren Weiquan Chua
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Academia, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore
- Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore, Singapore
- Liver Transplant Service, SingHealth Duke-National University of Singapore Transplant Centre, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Wei-Liang Loh
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Academia, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore
- Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Ek Khoon Tan
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Academia, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore
- Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore, Singapore
- Liver Transplant Service, SingHealth Duke-National University of Singapore Transplant Centre, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Jin Yao Teo
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Academia, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore
- Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Marianne Kit Har Au
- Group Finance Analytics, Singapore Health Services, Singapore, 168582, Singapore
- Finance, SingHealth Community Hospitals, Singapore, 168582, Singapore
- Finance, Regional Health System & Strategic Finance, Singapore Health Services, Singapore, 168582, Singapore
| | - Brian Kim Poh Goh
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Academia, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore
- Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore, Singapore
- Liver Transplant Service, SingHealth Duke-National University of Singapore Transplant Centre, Singapore, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Ten Haaft BHEA, Franssen S, van Dorst RWJJ, Rousian M, Pilz da Cunha G, de Wilde RF, Erdmann JI, Groot Koerkamp B, Hagendoorn J, Swijnenburg RJ. Robotic Versus Open Hepatic Arterial Infusion Pump Placement for Unresectable Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2024; 31:4022-4029. [PMID: 38498089 PMCID: PMC11076355 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-024-15127-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2023] [Accepted: 02/17/2024] [Indexed: 03/19/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Hepatic arterial infusion pump (HAIP) chemotherapy is an effective treatment for patients with unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA). HAIP chemotherapy requires a catheter inserted in the gastroduodenal artery and a subcutaneous pump. The catheter can be placed using an open or robotic approach. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to compare perioperative outcomes of robotic versus open HAIP placement in patients with unresectable iCCA. METHODS We analyzed patients with unresectable iCCA included in the PUMP-II trial from January 2020 to September 2022 undergoing robotic or open HAIP placement at Amsterdam UMC, Erasmus MC, and UMC Utrecht. The primary outcome was time to functional recovery (TTFR). RESULTS In total, 22 robotic and 28 open HAIP placements were performed. The median TTFR was 2 days after robotic placement versus 5 days after open HAIP placement (p < 0.001). One patient (4.5%) in the robotic group underwent a conversion to open because of a large bulky tumor leaning on the hilum immobilizing the liver. Postoperative complications were similar-36% (8/22) after robotic placement versus 39% (11/28) after open placement (p = 1.000). The median length of hospital stay was shorter in the robotic group-3 versus 5 days (p < 0.001). All 22 robotic patients initiated HAIP chemotherapy post-surgery, i.e. 93% (26/28) in the open group (p = 0.497). The median time to start HAIP chemotherapy was 14 versus 18 days (p = 0.153). CONCLUSION Robotic HAIP placement in patients with unresectable iCCA is a safe and effective procedure and is associated with a significantly shorter TTFR and hospital stay than open HAIP placement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Britte H E A Ten Haaft
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Stijn Franssen
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Merve Rousian
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Gabriela Pilz da Cunha
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Roeland F de Wilde
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joris I Erdmann
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Timmerhuis HC, Jensen CW, Ngongoni RF, Baiocchi M, DeLong JC, Ohkuma R, Dua MM, Norton JA, Poultsides GA, Worth PJ, Visser BC. Postoperative outcomes and costs of laparoscopic versus robotic distal pancreatectomy: a propensity-matched analysis. Surg Endosc 2024; 38:2095-2105. [PMID: 38438677 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-10728-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2023] [Accepted: 01/28/2024] [Indexed: 03/06/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) has established advantages over the open approach. The costs associated with robotic DP (RDP) versus laparoscopic DP (LDP) make the robotic approach controversial. We sought to compare outcomes and cost of LDP and RDP using propensity matching analysis at our institution. METHODS Patients undergoing LDP or RDP between 2000 and 2021 were retrospectively identified. Patients were optimally matched using age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists status, body mass index, and tumor size. Between-group differences were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test for continuous data, and the McNemar's test for categorical data. Outcomes included operative duration, conversion to open surgery, postoperative length of stay, pancreatic fistula rate, pseudocyst requiring intervention, and costs. RESULTS 298 patients underwent MIDP, 180 (60%) were laparoscopic and 118 (40%) were robotic. All RDPs were matched 1:1 to a laparoscopic case with absolute standardized mean differences for all matching covariates below 0.10, except for tumor type (0.16). RDP had longer operative times (268 vs 178 min, p < 0.01), shorter length of stay (2 vs 4 days, p < 0.01), fewer biochemical pancreatic leaks (11.9% vs 34.7%, p < 0.01), and fewer interventional radiological drainage (0% vs 5.9%, p = 0.01). The number of pancreatic fistulas (11.9% vs 5.1%, p = 0.12), collections requiring antibiotics or intervention (11.9% vs 5.1%, p = 0.12), and conversion rates (3.4% vs 5.1%, p = 0.72) were comparable between the two groups. The total direct index admission costs for RDP were 1.01 times higher than for LDP for FY16-19 (p = 0.372), and 1.33 times higher for FY20-22 (p = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS Although RDP required longer operative times than LDP, postoperative stays were shorter. The procedure cost of RDP was modestly more expensive than LDP, though this was partially offset by reduced hospital stay and reintervention rate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hester C Timmerhuis
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Christopher W Jensen
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Rejoice F Ngongoni
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Michael Baiocchi
- Stanford Prevention Research Center and Departments of Statistics and Health Research and Policy, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Jonathan C DeLong
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Rika Ohkuma
- Department of Quality, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Monica M Dua
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Jeffrey A Norton
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - George A Poultsides
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Patrick J Worth
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Brendan C Visser
- Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
- Department of Surgery, Stanford Health Care & Stanford University School of Medicine, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Song Y, Zou W, Gao Y, Zhao Z, Yin Z, Xiao C, Liu Q, Liu R. Short- and long-term outcomes of robotic versus open radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy: a retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study. Surg Endosc 2024; 38:1316-1328. [PMID: 38110793 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-10635-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2023] [Accepted: 11/29/2023] [Indexed: 12/20/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Robotic distal pancreatectomy has increasingly been accepted as it has overcome some of the limitations of open distal pancreatectomy, whilst the outcomes following robotic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are still uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the short and long-term outcomes of robotic RAMPS and open RAMPS for PDAC. METHODS The patients who underwent robotic RAMPS and open RAMPS for PDAC at our clinical centre between January 2017 and December 2021 were reviewed. After a propensity score matching (PSM) at a 1:1 ratio, the perioperative and pathological outcomes in the both groups were reviewed. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to identify independent prognosis factors for overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of these patients. RESULTS 318 cases were recorded in robotic and open groups. The robotic group showed advantages in operative time [205.00 (166.00, 240.00) min vs 235 (184.75, 270.00) min, P = 0.002], estimated blood loss [100 (50, 100) ml vs 300 (100, 400) ml, P < 0.001], delayed gastric emptying [0 vs 5.03%, P = 0.007] and postoperative hospital stay [7.00 (5.00, 10.00) days vs 11.00 (8.00, 14.00) days, P < 0.001]. There were no significant differences in rate of severe postoperative complications between the robotic group and the open group. Multivariable analysis showed that carbohydrate antigen 19-9, estimated blood loss, N stage, tumour differentiation, chemotherapy and vascular invasion were independent risk factors for OS and RFS of these patients. CONCLUSIONS Robotic RAMPS was safe and had some advantages over open RAMPS for PDAC. There were no significantly differences in oncological outcomes and long-term survival rates between the robotic and open groups. Robotic RAMPS expanded the indications for minimally invasive surgeries for PDAC to a certain extent.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuyao Song
- The Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China
| | - Wenbo Zou
- The Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China
- Department of General Surgery, No. 924 Hospital of PLA Joint Logistic Support Force, Guilin, China
| | - Yuanxing Gao
- The Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China
| | - Zhiming Zhao
- The Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China
| | - Zhuzeng Yin
- The Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China
| | - Chaohui Xiao
- The Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China
| | - Qu Liu
- Organ Transplantation Department, The Third Medical Center, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Rong Liu
- The Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Butano V, Ross SB, Sucandy I, Christodoulou M, Pattilachan TM, Neumeier R, Rosemurgy A. Effect of insurance status on perioperative outcomes after robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a propensity-score matched analysis. J Robot Surg 2024; 18:90. [PMID: 38386222 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-01841-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2023] [Accepted: 01/21/2024] [Indexed: 02/23/2024]
Abstract
The influence of Medicaid or being uninsured is prevailingly thought to negatively impact a patient's socioeconomic and postoperative course, yet little has been published to support this claim specifically in reference to robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. This study was undertaken to determine impact of health insurance type on perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Following IRB approval, we prospectively followed 364 patients who underwent robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Patients were stratified by insurance status (i.e., Private, Medicare, and Medicaid/Uninsured); 100 patients were 2:2:1 propensity-score matched by age, BMI, ASA class, pathology, 8th edition AJCC staging, and tumor size. Perioperative variables were compared utilizing contingency testing and ANOVA. Statistical significance was accepted at a p-value ≤ 0.05 and data are presented as median (mean ± SD). The 100 patients undergoing propensity-score matching were 64 (65 ± 9.1) years old with a BMI of 27 (27 ± 4.9) kg/m2 and ASA class of 3 (3 ± 0.5). Operative duration was 421 (428 ± 105.9) minutes and estimated blood loss was 200 (385 ± 795.0) mL. There were 4 in-hospital deaths and 8 readmissions within 30 days of discharge. Total hospital cost was $32,064 (38,014 ± 22,205.94). After matching, no differences were found in pre-, intra-, and short-term postoperative variables among patients with different insurances, including hospital cost and time to initiate adjuvant treatment, which was 8 (9 ± 7.9) weeks for patients with malignant disease. In our hepatopancreaticobiliary program, health insurance status did not impact perioperative outcomes or hospital costs. These findings highlight that financial coverage does not influence quality of perioperative care, reinforcing the equity of robotic surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vincent Butano
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, 3000 Medical Park Drive, Suite#500, Tampa, FL, 33613, USA
| | - Sharona B Ross
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, 3000 Medical Park Drive, Suite#500, Tampa, FL, 33613, USA.
| | - Iswanto Sucandy
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, 3000 Medical Park Drive, Suite#500, Tampa, FL, 33613, USA
| | - Maria Christodoulou
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, 3000 Medical Park Drive, Suite#500, Tampa, FL, 33613, USA
| | - Tara M Pattilachan
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, 3000 Medical Park Drive, Suite#500, Tampa, FL, 33613, USA
| | - Ruth Neumeier
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, 3000 Medical Park Drive, Suite#500, Tampa, FL, 33613, USA
| | - Alexander Rosemurgy
- Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampa, 3000 Medical Park Drive, Suite#500, Tampa, FL, 33613, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Jureidini R, Namur GN, Ribeiro TC, Bacchella T, Stolzemburg L, Jukemura J, Ribeiro Junior U, Cecconello I. ROBOTIC ASSISTED VERSUS LAPAROSCOPIC DISTAL PANCREATECTOMY: A RETROSPECTIVE STUDY. ARQUIVOS BRASILEIROS DE CIRURGIA DIGESTIVA : ABCD = BRAZILIAN ARCHIVES OF DIGESTIVE SURGERY 2023; 36:e1783. [PMID: 38088728 PMCID: PMC10712921 DOI: 10.1590/0102-672020230065e1783] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/02/2023] [Accepted: 09/22/2023] [Indexed: 12/17/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is associated with less blood loss and faster functional recovery. However, the benefits of robotic assisted distal pancreatectomy (RDP) over laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) are unknown. AIMS To compare RDP versus LDP for surgical treatment of benign lesions, pre-malignant and borderline malignant pancreatic neoplasias. METHODS This is a retrospective study comparing LDP with RDP. Main outcomes were overall morbidity and overall costs. Secondary outcomes were pancreatic fistula (PF), infectious complications, readmission, operative time (OT) and length of hospital stay (LOS). RESULTS Thirty patients submitted to LDP and 29 submitted to RDP were included in the study. There was no difference regarding preoperative characteristics. There was no difference regarding overall complications (RDP - 72,4% versus LDP - 80%, p=0,49). Costs were superior for patients submitted to RDP (RDP=US$ 6,688 versus LDP=US$ 6,149, p=0,02), mostly due to higher costs of surgical materials (RDP=US$ 2,364 versus LDP=1,421, p=0,00005). Twenty-one patients submitted to RDP and 24 to LDP developed pancreatic fistula (PF), but only 4 RDP and 7 LDP experienced infectious complications associated with PF. OT (RDP=224 min. versus LDP=213 min., p=0.36) was similar, as well as conversion to open procedure (1 RDP and 2 LDP). CONCLUSIONS The postoperative morbidity of robotic distal pancreatectomy is comparable to laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. However, the costs of robotic distal pancreatectomy are slightly higher.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ricardo Jureidini
- Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo State Cancer Institute, Department of Gastroenterology - São Paulo (SP), Brazil
| | - Guilherme Naccache Namur
- Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo State Cancer Institute, Department of Gastroenterology - São Paulo (SP), Brazil
| | - Thiago Costa Ribeiro
- Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo State Cancer Institute, Department of Gastroenterology - São Paulo (SP), Brazil
| | - Telesforo Bacchella
- Univesidade de São Paulo, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Gastroenterology - São Paulo (SP), Brazil
| | - Lucas Stolzemburg
- Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo State Cancer Institute, Department of Gastroenterology - São Paulo (SP), Brazil
| | - José Jukemura
- Univesidade de São Paulo, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Gastroenterology - São Paulo (SP), Brazil
| | - Ulysses Ribeiro Junior
- Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo State Cancer Institute, Department of Gastroenterology - São Paulo (SP), Brazil
- Univesidade de São Paulo, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Gastroenterology - São Paulo (SP), Brazil
| | - Ivan Cecconello
- Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo State Cancer Institute, Department of Gastroenterology - São Paulo (SP), Brazil
- Univesidade de São Paulo, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Gastroenterology - São Paulo (SP), Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Rehman S, Patel I, Bartlett D, Mirza D. Minimally Invasive versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy in the 2020s: Recent Institutional Experience and a Narrative Review of Current Evidence. J Clin Med 2023; 12:6578. [PMID: 37892716 PMCID: PMC10607154 DOI: 10.3390/jcm12206578] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2023] [Revised: 09/24/2023] [Accepted: 10/10/2023] [Indexed: 10/29/2023] Open
Abstract
(1) Background: Distal pancreatectomy is a standard treatment for tumours of the pancreatic body and tail. Minimally invasive techniques for all types of pancreatic tumours (benign and malignant) are being established, while concerns regarding oncological safety, cost effectiveness and learning curves are being explored with prospective studies. This paper presents our unit's data in the context of the above concerns and provides a relevant narrative review of the current literature. (2) Methods: Data were collected retrospectively between 2014 and 2021 for all adult patients who underwent elective distal pancreatectomy in our tertiary care referral HPB Unit. Data on demographics, underlying pathology, perioperative variables and post-operative complications were collected and reported using descriptive statistics. On review of the Miami guidelines, four important but less validated areas regarding distal pancreatectomy are presented in light of the current evidence; these are recent randomised controlled trials, oncological safety, cost effectiveness and learning curves in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP). (3) Results: 207 patients underwent distal pancreatectomy in total from 2014-2021, with 114 and 93 patients undergoing open and minimally invasive techniques, respectively. 44 patients were operated on for PDAC in the open vs. 17 in the minimally invasive group. The operative time was 212 min for the open and 248 min for the minimally invasive group. The incidence of pancreatic fistula was higher in the minimally invasive group vs. the open group (16% vs. 4%). (4) Conclusions: Our unit's data conform with the published literature, including three randomised control trials. These published studies will not only pave the way for establishing minimally invasive techniques for suitable patients, but also define their limitations and indications. Future studies will inform us about the oncological safety, cost effectiveness, overall survival and learning curves regarding patients undergoing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Saad Rehman
- Liver Transplant and HPB Unit, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2GW, UK
- Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK
| | - Ishaan Patel
- Liver Transplant and HPB Unit, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2GW, UK
| | - David Bartlett
- Liver Transplant and HPB Unit, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2GW, UK
| | - Darius Mirza
- Hon Professor of HPB and Transplant Surgery, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Lee S, Varghese C, Fung M, Patel B, Pandanaboyana S, Dasari BVM. Systematic review and meta-analysis of cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive versus open pancreatic resections. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2023; 408:306. [PMID: 37572127 PMCID: PMC10423165 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03017-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2023] [Accepted: 07/11/2023] [Indexed: 08/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The systematic review is aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open distal pancreatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy. METHOD The MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, and clinical trial registries were systematically searched using the PRISMA framework. Studies of adults aged ≥ 18 year comparing laparoscopic and/or robotic versus open DP and/or PD that reported cost of operation or index admission, and cost-effectiveness outcomes were included. The risk of bias of non-randomised studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, while the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB2) tool was used for randomised studies. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for continuous variables. RESULTS Twenty-two studies (152,651 patients) were included in the systematic review and 15 studies in the meta-analysis (3 RCTs; 3 case-controlled; 9 retrospective studies). Of these, 1845 patients underwent MIS (1686 laparoscopic and 159 robotic) and 150,806 patients open surgery. The cost of surgical procedure (SMD 0.89; 95% CI 0.35 to 1.43; I2 = 91%; P = 0.001), equipment (SMD 3.73; 95% CI 1.55 to 5.91; I2 = 98%; P = 0.0008), and operating room occupation (SMD 1.17, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.24; I2 = 95%; P = 0.03) was higher with MIS. However, overall index hospitalisation costs trended lower with MIS (SMD - 0.13; 95% CI - 0.35 to 0.06; I2 = 80%; P = 0.17). There was significant heterogeneity among the studies. CONCLUSION Minimally invasive major pancreatic surgery entailed higher intraoperative but similar overall index hospitalisation costs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Suhyun Lee
- University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Chris Varghese
- Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | | | - Bijendra Patel
- Institute of Cancer, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK
- Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Sanjay Pandanaboyana
- HPB and Transplant Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| | - Bobby V M Dasari
- Department of HBP and Liver Transplant Surgery, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TH, UK.
- Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Chok AY, Zhao Y, Tan IEH, Au MKH, Tan EJKW. Cost-effectiveness comparison of minimally invasive, robotic and open approaches in colorectal surgery: a systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Int J Colorectal Dis 2023; 38:86. [PMID: 36988723 DOI: 10.1007/s00384-023-04361-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/28/2023] [Indexed: 03/30/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE This study compares the cost-effectiveness of open, laparoscopic (LAP), laparoscopic-assisted (LAPA), hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL), and robotic colorectal surgery using a network meta-analysis. METHODS Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the cost-effectiveness of comparing the five different approaches in colorectal surgery were included in a literature search until September 2022. Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted, and surface under cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) values, odds ratio (OR), and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were reported for total costs, surgical costs, operating time, length of stay (LOS), and postoperative outcomes. Cluster analysis was performed to examine the similarity and classification of surgical approaches into homogeneous clusters. The cophenetic correlation coefficient (cc) was evaluated to identify the most cost-effective clustering method. The primary outcomes assessed were: costs-morbidity, costs-mortality, and costs-efficacy, measuring total costs against postoperative complications, mortality rate, and LOS, respectively. RESULTS 22 RCTs with 4239 patients were included. Open surgery had the lowest total costs, surgical costs, and operating time but the longest LOS and most postoperative complications. LOS was significantly decreased in LAP compared to open surgery (OR 0.67, 95% CrI 0.46-0.96). Robotic surgery resulted in the highest total costs, surgical costs, and most extended operative duration but the shortest LOS and lowest mortality. LAPA and robotic surgery were superior in the costs-morbidity analysis. HAL was associated with the worst costs-mortality profile. LAP, LAPA, and HAL were better in terms of costs-efficacy. CONCLUSION Overall, LAP and LAPA are the most cost-effective approaches for colorectal surgery in terms of overall postoperative complications, mortality, and LOS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aik Yong Chok
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Academia, 20 College Road, 169856, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Yun Zhao
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Academia, 20 College Road, 169856, Singapore, Singapore
- Group Finance Analytics, Singapore Health Services, Singapore, 168582, Singapore
| | - Ivan En-Howe Tan
- Group Finance Analytics, Singapore Health Services, Singapore, 168582, Singapore
| | - Marianne Kit Har Au
- Group Finance Analytics, Singapore Health Services, Singapore, 168582, Singapore
| | - Emile John Kwong Wei Tan
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Academia, 20 College Road, 169856, Singapore, Singapore.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Masuda H, Kotecha K, Gall T, Gill AJ, Mittal A, Samra JS. Transition from open to robotic distal pancreatectomy in a low volume pancreatic surgery country: a single Australian centre experience. ANZ J Surg 2023; 93:151-159. [PMID: 36511144 DOI: 10.1111/ans.18199] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2022] [Revised: 10/14/2022] [Accepted: 12/01/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Advances in technology and techniques have allowed for robotic distal pancreatectomies to be readily performed in patients at high volume centres. This study describes the experience of a single surgeon during the learning curve and transition from open to robotic distal pancreatectomy in Australia, a traditionally low volume pancreatic surgery country. METHODS All patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy at an Australian-based tertiary referral centre between 2010 and 2021 were reviewed retrospectively. Demographic, clinicopathologic and survival data were analysed to compare perioperative and oncological outcomes between patients who underwent open, laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomies. RESULTS A total of 178 distal pancreatectomies were identified for analysis during the study period. Ninety-one open distal pancreatectomies (ODP), 48 laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies (LDP), and 39 robotic distal pancreatectomies (RDP) were performed. Robotic distal pancreatectomy was non-inferior with respect to perioperative outcomes and yielded statistically non-significant advantages over LDP and ODP. CONCLUSION RDP is feasible and can be performed safely in well-selected patients during the learning phase at large pancreatic centres in a traditionally low-volume country like Australia. Referral to large pancreatic centres where access to the robotic platform and surgeon experience is not a barrier, and where a robust multidisciplinary team meeting can take place, remains pivotal in the introduction and transition toward the robotic approach for management of patients with pancreatic body or tail lesions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hiro Masuda
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Krishna Kotecha
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Tamara Gall
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Anthony J Gill
- Northern Clinical School, University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.,NSW Health Pathology, Department of Anatomical Pathology, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia.,Cancer Diagnosis and Pathology Group, Kolling Institute of Medical Research, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Anubhav Mittal
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia.,Northern Clinical School, University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.,School of Medicine, University of Notre Dame, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Jaswinder S Samra
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia.,Northern Clinical School, University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Stokes EA, Harris RA, Dabner L, McKeon HE, Kaur S, Paramasivan S, Realpe A, Elliott D, Batchelor TJ, Dunning J, Shackcloth M, Anikin V, Naidu B, Belcher E, Loubani M, Zamvar V, De Sousa P, Blazeby JM, Rogers CA, Lim E, Wordsworth S. Cost-Effectiveness of Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery Compared to Open Lobectomy in Patients with Early-Stage Lung Cancer: Findings from the VIOLET Randomised Controlled Trial. Lung Cancer 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2022.12.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
|
14
|
Winters C, Subramanian V, Valdastri P. Robotic, self-propelled, self-steerable, and disposable colonoscopes: Reality or pipe dream? A state of the art review. World J Gastroenterol 2022; 28:5093-5110. [PMID: 36188716 PMCID: PMC9516669 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v28.i35.5093] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/06/2022] [Revised: 06/21/2022] [Accepted: 09/01/2022] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Robotic colonoscopes could potentially provide a comfortable, less painful and safer alternative to standard colonoscopy. Recent exciting developments in this field are pushing the boundaries to what is possible in the future. This article provides a comprehensive review of the current work in robotic colonoscopes including self-propelled, steerable and disposable endoscopes that could be alternatives to standard colonoscopy. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of these systems currently in development and highlight the technical readiness of each system to help the reader understand where and when such systems may be available for routine clinical use and get an idea of where and in which situation they can best be deployed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Conchubhair Winters
- Leeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, St. James’s University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF, United Kingdom
| | - Venkataraman Subramanian
- Leeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, St. James’s University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF, United Kingdom
| | - Pietro Valdastri
- School of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Ielpo B, Podda M, Burdio F, Sanchez-Velazquez P, Guerrero MA, Nuñez J, Toledano M, Morales-Conde S, Mayol J, Lopez-Cano M, Espín-Basany E, Pellino G. Cost-Effectiveness of Robotic vs. Laparoscopic Surgery for Different Surgical Procedures: Protocol for a Prospective, Multicentric Study (ROBOCOSTES). Front Surg 2022; 9:866041. [PMID: 36227017 PMCID: PMC9549953 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.866041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2022] [Accepted: 03/31/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The studies which address the impact of costs of robotic vs. laparoscopic approach on quality of life (cost-effectiveness studies) are scares in general surgery. Methods The Spanish national study on cost-effectiveness differences among robotic and laparoscopic surgery (ROBOCOSTES) is designed as a prospective, multicentre, national, observational study. The aim is to determine in which procedures robotic surgery is more cost-effective than laparoscopic surgery. Several surgical operations and patient populations will be evaluated (distal pancreatectomy, gastrectomy, sleeve gastrectomy, inguinal hernioplasty, rectal resection for cancer, Heller cardiomiotomy and Nissen procedure). Discussion The results of this study will demonstrate which treatment (laparoscopic or robotic) and in which population is more cost-effective. This study will also assess the impact of previous surgical experience on main outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benedetto Ielpo
- Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain
- *Correspondence: Benedetto Ielpo
| | - Mauro Podda
- Department of Surgical Science, Emergency Surgery Unit, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Fernando Burdio
- Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Maria-Alejandra Guerrero
- Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Javier Nuñez
- IVEC (Instituto de Validación de la Eficiencia Clínica), Fundación de Investigación HM Hospitales, Madrid, Spain
| | - Miguel Toledano
- General Surgery Department, University Hospital Rio Hortega, Valladolid, Spain
| | - Salvador Morales-Conde
- Unit of Innovation in Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University Hospital Virgen del Rocio, University of Seville, Seville, Spain
| | - Julio Mayol
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Clinico San Carlos, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | - Manuel Lopez-Cano
- Abdominal Wall Surgery Unit, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, UAB, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Eloy Espín-Basany
- Colorectal Surgery, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, UAB, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Gianluca Pellino
- Colorectal Surgery, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, UAB, Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, Università degli Studi della Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, Naples, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Guerra F, Marra U, Giuliani G, Coratti A. Robotic Extended Ultrasound-Guided Distal Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Metastases from Uveal Melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2022; 29:2469-2470. [PMID: 34839428 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-021-11116-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/25/2021] [Accepted: 11/09/2021] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Isolated pancreatic metastasis from melanoma is extremely uncommon and accounts for approximately only 2% of visceral disseminations of melanoma.1-3 Interestingly, pancreatic localizations disproportionately derive from primary ocular melanoma.1,2 Despite the currently available evidence on this argument being scarce, the survival outcomes of patients receiving resection for visceral melanoma metastases are reported to be superior than those managed by non-surgical modalities.4,5 CASE PRESENTATION: A 59-year-old female with a history of uveal melanoma presented with surveillance-detected metastatic disease confined to the pancreas. Computed tomography demonstrated one lesion located in the body of the pancreas and one further lesion in the head. The presented video illustrates the details of an extended, ultrasound-guided, robotic distal pancreatectomy. DISCUSSION Metastatic ocular melanoma has a highly variable natural history, which ranges from a fulminant course to prolonged stable disease.6 In contrast to cutaneous melanoma derivation, metastases mostly occur via hematogenous spread, in the absence of lymphatic drainage of the eye.6,7 Liver is the most common site of secondary localization and is not involved by metastatic disease in <10% of cases. Interestingly, patients with extrahepatic metastases tend to have significantly better survival rates than those with hepatic disease.6,7 Fewer than 100 cases of pancreatic metastasis from malignant melanoma are reported in the medical literature, including a relatively high percentage of primary ocular malignancies.1,5 Furthermore, the prognosis of these patients is essentially unknown, although metastatic melanoma of both cutaneous and ocular origin generally indicates poor survival.1,5,6 Although no robust evidence is available, a number of reports suggest that pancreatic resection may improve survival in these patients.1-4 A large retrospective review investigating the association between treatment modalities and survival of patients with abdominal visceral melanoma metastases showed that patients receiving resection had a superior median survival compared with patients treated medically. Although patients with metastases of the gastrointestinal tract showed the best outcomes following surgery, patients with pancreas metastasis (of both cutaneous and ocular origin) undergoing resection also exhibited a significant survival advantage compared with those treated non-surgically.5 Minimally invasive pancreatectomy is gaining momentum.8 In fact, in selected patients there are distinct advantages compared with conventional surgery owing to reduced postoperative morbidity and earlier return to daily activities, while maintaining the oncological tenets of resection.8-10 Recent reports suggest that the application of robots may provide some advantages over conventional laparoscopy, especially for patients necessitating technically challenging surgeries.8,11 Such benefits are mainly in relation to the rate of conversion, length of postoperative hospital stay, and number of cases necessary to surmount the learning curve and reach optimal performance; however, no definitive conclusions can be drawn due to the lack of high-level evidence.8,10.
Collapse
|