Latest Comprehensive Medical Resource Consumption in Robot-Assisted versus Laparoscopic and Traditional Open Radical Prostatectomy: A Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study

Systematic literature review of cost-effectiveness analyses of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for localised prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

Review and assess cost-effectiveness studies of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) for localised prostate cancer compared with open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP).

DESIGN

Systematic review.

SETTING

PubMed, Embase, Scopus, International HTA database, the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination database and various HTA websites were searched (January 2005 to March 2021) to identify the eligible cost-effectiveness studies.

PARTICIPANTS

Cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, or cost-minimization analyses examining RARP versus ORP or LRP were included in this systematic review.

INTERVENTIONS

Different surgical approaches to treat localized prostate cancer: RARP compared with ORP and LRP.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

A structured narrative synthesis was developed to summarize results of cost, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness results (eg, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]). Study quality was assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria Extended checklist. Application of medical device features were evaluated.

RESULTS

Twelve studies met inclusion criteria, 11 of which were cost-utility analyses. Higher quality-adjusted life-years and higher costs were observed with RARP compared with ORP or LRP in 11 studies (91%). Among four studies comparing RARP with LRP, three reported RARP was dominant or cost-effective. Among ten studies comparing RARP with ORP, RARP was more cost-effective in five, not cost-effective in two, and inconclusive in three studies. Studies with longer time horizons tended to report favorable cost-effectiveness results for RARP. Nine studies (75%) were rated of moderate or good quality. Recommended medical device features were addressed to varying degrees within the literature as follows: capital investment included in most studies, dynamic pricing considered in about half, and learning curve and incremental innovation were poorly addressed.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite study heterogeneity, RARP was more costly and effective compared with ORP and LRP in most studies and likely to be more cost-effective, particularly over a multiple year or lifetime time horizon. Further cost-effectiveness analyses for RARP that more thoroughly consider medical device features and use an appropriate time horizon are needed.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021246811.

The Latest Data Specifically Focused on Long-Term Oncologic Prognostication for Very Old Adults with Acute Vulnerable Localized Prostate Cancer: A Nationwide Cohort Study

Purpose: Few studies have evaluated the prime treatment choice for men older than 80 years with acute vulnerable localized prostate cancer (AV-LPC). Clinicians have been deeply troubled by this near end-of-life medical choice for a very specific group of patients. We compared the oncological prognostication of very old patients with AV-LPC after they underwent either radical prostatectomy (RP) or massive-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) coupled with long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) over a long-term investigation. Methods: In this nationwide cohort study, we used the Taiwan Cancer Registry Database and retrieved information related to patients (aged ≥ 80 years) with AV-LPC who underwent standard RP (the RP group) or massive-dose IMRT + long-term ADT (at least 72 Gy and ADT use ≥18 months; the IMRT + ADT group). After potential confounders were controlled for using propensity score matching (PSM), we utilized the Cox proportional hazards regression to evaluate the oncologic prognostication. Results: The IMRT + ADT group had a significantly higher adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for all-cause mortality (aHR, 2.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.41−2.87) than the RP group. Analysis of the secondary outcomes revealed that compared with the RP group, the aHRs of biochemical failure, locoregional recurrence, and distant metastasis in the IMRT + ADT group were 1.77 (95% CI: 1.36−2.11, p < 0.0001), 1.12 (95% CI: 1.04−1.33, p < 0.0001), and 1.15 (95% CI: 1.06−1.71, p = 0.0311), respectively. Conclusion: RP provides more favorable oncological prognostication than IMRT in very old adults with AV-LPC.

Long-Term Medical Resource Consumption of Radical Prostatectomy vs. Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for Old Patients With Prostate Cancer: A Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study

Purpose

Few studies have compared the long-term medical resource consumption between radical prostatectomy (RP) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) among old (≥80 years) patients with localized prostate cancer (LPC), particularly in those at high risk of prostate adenocarcinoma.

Patients and Methods

The propensity score matching was conducted to investigate the medical expenditure of two therapeutic modalities (RP and IMRT) in elderly patients with high-risk LPC (HR-LPC). The generalized linear mixed and logistic regression models were employed to evaluate the number of postdischarge visits and medical reimbursement for urinary diseases or complications and the number of hospitalizations for treatment-related complications over 5 years after treatment, respectively.

Results

Significant differences were observed in the median or mean urology clinic visit numbers across the two therapeutic modalities from the first until fifth year post treatment (p < 0.0001). After adjustment for covariates, the mean difference [95% confidence interval (CI)] of urology clinic visit numbers between RP and IMRT was 13.07 (10.45-15.49, P < 0.0001), 7.47 (8.01-14.92, P < 0.0001), 8.24 (4.59-9.90, P < 0.0001), 6.63 (3.55-11.70, P < 0.0001), and 5.02 (1.12-8.73, P < 0.0001) for the first, second, third, fourth, and fifth years, respectively. In the logistic regression multivariate model with adjustment for covariates [therapy type, age, diagnosis year, income, hospital area, hospital level (academic or nonacademic), clinical and pathological T-stage, grade (Gleason score), pretreatment PSA level (ng/ml), and D'Amico risk classification], the adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) of IMRT was 2.10 (1.37-2.56, P = 0.0013), 1.55 (1.08-2.21, P = 0.0151), 1.35 (1.08-2.21, P = 0.0084), 1.24 (1.07-2.21, P = 0.0071), and 1.09 (1.02-1.81, P = 0.0379) for the first, second, third, fourth, and fifth years, respectively, compared with those of RP. The mean difference (95% CI) of total medical claims amounts of RP and IMRT between the RP and IMRT + ADT groups was 2,69,823 New Taiwan Dollars (NTD) (247,676-291,970, P < 0.0001), 40,803 NTD (17,379-54,228, P < 0.0001), 36,202 NTD (24,375-68,029, P < 0.0001), 26,708 NTD (11,179-54,595, P = 0.0321), and 12,173 NTD (17,140-41,487, P = 0.0187) for the first, second, third, fourth, and fifth years, respectively.

Conclusion

The long-term medical resource consumption was higher in old men with HR-LPC undergoing IMRT than in those undergoing RP.

Acute, Subchronic, and Chronic Complications of Radical Prostatectomy Versus Radiotherapy With Hormone Therapy in Older Adults With High-Risk Prostate Adenocarcinoma

Purpose

To compare acute, subchronic, and chronic complications between older patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer (HR-LPC) receiving radical prostatectomy (RP) and high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) combined with long-term hormone therapy (HT).

Patients and Methods

We recruited older patients (≥80 years) with HR-LPC from the Taiwan Cancer Registry database. After propensity score matching, logistic regression analysis was used to compare the acute, subchronic, and chronic complication rates between patients who underwent RP (the RP group) and high-dose IMRT combined with long-term HT (the IMRT+HT group).

Results

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) symptoms and urinary incontinence (UI) were the most common complications over 5 years (BPH symptoms: RP, 17.69%; IMRT+HT, 29.58%; UI: RP, 10.47%; IMRT+HT, 5.50%). Compared with the RP group, the IMRT+HT group had higher odds of BPH symptoms and lower odds of UI and hernia after the 5-year follow-up period. The impotence rates were significantly higher in the IMRT+HT group than in the RP group at 3 months and 1 year after treatment and became nonsignificant after 2 years. At 5 years after treatment, the IMRT+HT group had lower risks of UI (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28–0.88) and hernia (aOR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.11–0.82) and a higher risk of BPH symptoms (aOR, 4.15; 95% CI, 2.82–7.37) than the RP group.

Conclusion

IMRT+HT was associated with lower UI and hernia risks than RP. By contrast, RP was associated with fewer complications of BPH over the follow-up period and less impotence during the first year after treatment. Our findings provide important and valuable references for shared decision-making for optimal therapy selection among older men with HR-LPC.

Cost-effectiveness of Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer in the UK

IMPORTANCE

The cost-effectiveness of different surgical techniques for radical prostatectomy remains a subject of debate. Emergence of recent critical clinical data and changes in surgical equipment costs due to their shared use by different clinical specialties necessitate an updated cost-effectiveness analysis in a centralized, largely government-funded health care system such as the UK National Health Service (NHS).

OBJECTIVE

To compare robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) with open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and laparoscopic-assisted radical prostatectomy (LRP) using contemporary data on clinical outcomes, costs, and surgical volumes in the UK.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This economic analysis used a Markov model developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of RARP, LRP, and ORP to treat localized prostate cancer. The model was constructed from the perspective of the UK NHS. The model simulated 65-year-old men who underwent radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer and were followed up for a 10-year period. Data were analyzed from May 1, 2020, to July 31, 2021.

EXPOSURES

Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy, LRP, and ORP.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs (direct medical costs and costs outside the NHS), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

RESULTS

Compared with LRP, RARP cost £1785 (US $2350) less and had 0.24 more QALYs gained; thus, RARP was a dominant option compared with LRP. Compared with ORP, RARP had 0.12 more QALYs gained but cost £526 (US $693) more during the 10-year time frame, resulting in an ICER of £4293 (US $5653)/QALY. Because the ICER was below the £30 000 (US $39 503) willingness-to-pay threshold, RARP was more cost-effective than ORP in the UK. The most sensitive variable influencing the cost-effectiveness of RARP was the lower risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR). Scenario analysis indicated RARP would remain more cost-effective than ORP as long as the BCR hazard ratios comparing RARP vs ORP were less than 0.99.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that in the UK, RARP has an ICER lower than the willingness-to-pay threshold and thus is likely a cost-effective surgical treatment option for patients with localized prostate cancer compared with ORP and LRP. The results were mainly driven by the lower risk of BCR for RARP. These findings may differ in other health care settings where different thresholds and costs may apply.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Radical Prostatectomy versus IMRT with Long-Term Hormone Therapy for Relatively Young Patients with High- to Very High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer

Simple Summary

That the definitive optimal treatments for relatively young men (aged ≤ 65 years) with high- or very high-risk localized prostate cancer (HR/VHR-LPC) are radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiation plus antiandrogen therapy (RT-ADT) is controversial. To the best of our knowledge, our study is the first and largest to examine biochemical failure (BF), all-cause death, locoregional recurrence, and distant metastasis in relatively young men with HR/VHR-LPC as defined by National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk strata. After head-to-head propensity score matching was used to balance the potential confounders, a multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to analyze oncologic outcomes. In relatively young men with HR/VHR-LPC, RP and RT-ADT yielded similar oncologic outcomes and RP reduced the risk of BF compared with RT-ADT.

Abstract

That intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plus antiandrogen therapy (IMRT-ADT) and radical prostatectomy (RP) are the definitive optimal treatments for relatively young patients (aged ≤ 65 years) with high- or very high-risk localized prostate cancer (HR/VHR-LPC), but remains controversial. We conducted a national population-based cohort study by using propensity score matching (PSM) to evaluate the clinical outcomes of RP and IMRT-ADT in relatively young patients with HR/VHR-LPC. Methods: We used the Taiwan Cancer Registry database to evaluate clinical outcomes in relatively young (aged ≤ 65 years) patients with HR/VHR-LPC, as defined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk strata. The patients had received RP or IMRT-ADT (high-dose, ≥72 Gy plus long-term, 1.5–3 years, ADT). Head-to-head PSM was used to balance potential confounders. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to analyze oncologic outcomes. Results: High-dose IMRT-ADT had a higher risk of biochemical failure (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 2.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.56–2.65, p < 0.0001) compared with RP; IMRT-ADT did not have an increased risk of all-cause death (aHR = 1.2, 95% CI 0.65–2.24, p = 0.564), locoregional recurrence (aHR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.67–1.06, p = 0.3524), or distant metastasis (aHR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.56–1.9, p = 0.9176) compared with RP. Conclusion: In relatively young patients with HR/VHR-LPC, RP and IMRT-ADT yielded similar oncologic outcomes and RP reduced the risk of biochemical failure compared with IMRT-ADT.

Rethinking Autonomous Surgery: Focusing on Enhancement over Autonomy

CONTEXT

As robot-assisted surgery is increasingly used in surgical care, the engineering research effort towards surgical automation has also increased significantly. Automation promises to enhance surgical outcomes, offload mundane or repetitive tasks, and improve workflow. However, we must ask an important question: should autonomous surgery be our long-term goal?

OBJECTIVE

To provide an overview of the engineering requirements for automating control systems, summarize technical challenges in automated robotic surgery, and review sensing and modeling techniques to capture real-time human behaviors for integration into the robotic control loop for enhanced shared or collaborative control.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We performed a nonsystematic search of the English language literature up to March 25, 2021. We included original studies related to automation in robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery and human-centered sensing and modeling.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

We identified four comprehensive review papers that present techniques for automating portions of surgical tasks. Sixteen studies relate to human-centered sensing technologies and 23 to computer vision and/or advanced artificial intelligence or machine learning methods for skill assessment. Twenty-two studies evaluate or review the role of haptic or adaptive guidance during some learning task, with only a few applied to robotic surgery. Finally, only three studies discuss the role of some form of training in patient outcomes and none evaluated the effects of full or semi-autonomy on patient outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Rather than focusing on autonomy, which eliminates the surgeon from the loop, research centered on more fully understanding the surgeon's behaviors, goals, and limitations could facilitate a superior class of collaborative surgical robots that could be more effective and intelligent than automation alone.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We reviewed the literature for studies on automation in surgical robotics and on modeling of human behavior in human-machine interaction. The main application is to enhance the ability of surgical robotic systems to collaborate more effectively and intelligently with human surgeon operators.