Is robotic lobectomy cheaper? A micro-cost analysis

Journal of Robotic Surgery - Tập 16 Số 6 - Trang 1441-1450
Ben Shanahan1, Usha Kreaden2, Jan Sørensen3, Steven Stamenkovic4, Karen Redmond5
1Professor Eoin O'Malley National Thoracic and Transplant Centre, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Eccles St., Dublin, D07R2WY, Ireland
2Fellow, Biostatistics & Global Access Value & Economics, Intuitive Surgical Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA
3Healthcare Outcomes Research Centre, RCSI, University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland
4The Thorax Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
5School of Medicine and Medical Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

Tóm tắt

Abstract

Higher capital costs and operating room costs associated with Lobectomy via Robot Assisted Thoracic Surgery (RATS) have previously been suggested as the principal contributors to the elevated overall cost. This study uses a micro-costing approach to a previous analysis of clinical outcomes of RATS, Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery (VATS) and Open Lobectomy to evaluate the most significant cost drivers for the higher cost of robot-assisted lobectomy. A micro-costing model was developed to reflect the pathway of patients from day of surgery through the first 30 days following lobectomy. Costs were provided for RATS, VATS and Open approaches. Sensitivity analysis was performed specifically in the area of staff costs. A threshold sensitivity analysis of the overall cost components was also performed. Total cost per case for the RATS approach was €13,321 for the VATS approach €11,567, and for the Open approach €12,582. The overall cost differences were driven primarily by the elevated consumable costs associated with RATS Lobectomy. Capital costs account for a relatively small proportion of the per-case cost difference. This study presents a detailed analysis of the cost drivers for lobectomy, modelled for the three primary surgical approaches. We believe this is a useful tool for surgeons, hospital management, and service commissioning agencies to accurately and comprehensively determine where cost savings can be applied in their programme to improve the cost-effectiveness of RATS lobectomy.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Barta JA, Powell CA, Wisnivesky JP (2019) Global epidemiology of lung cancer. Ann Glob Health 85(1):8

Yu JB, Soulos PR, Cramer LD, Decker RH, Kim AW, Gross CP (2015) Comparative effectiveness of surgery and radiosurgery for stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer 121(14):2341–2349

Agostini P, Lugg ST, Adams K, Vartsaba N, Kalkat MS, Rajesh PB et al (2017) Postoperative pulmonary complications and rehabilitation requirements following lobectomy: a propensity score matched study of patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus thoracotomydagger. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 24(6):931–937

Falcoz PE, Puyraveau M, Thomas PA, Decaluwe H, Hurtgen M, Petersen RH et al (2016) Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus open lobectomy for primary non-small-cell lung cancer: a propensity-matched analysis of outcome from the European society of thoracic surgeon database. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 49(2):602–609

Kuritzky AM, Ryder BA, Ng T (2013) Long-term survival outcomes of video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) lobectomy after transitioning from open lobectomy. Ann Surg Oncol 20(8):2734–2740

Yang CJ, Kumar A, Klapper JA, Hartwig MG, Tong BC, Harpole DH Jr et al (2017) A national analysis of long-term survival following thoracoscopic versus open lobectomy for stage I non-small-cell lung cancer. Ann Surg 269:163

Leal Ghezzi T, Campos CO (2016) 30 years of robotic surgery. World J Surg 40(10):2550–2557

Melfi FM, Menconi GF, Mariani AM, Angeletti CA (2002) Early experience with robotic technology for thoracoscopic surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 21(5):864–868

O’Sullivan KE, Kreaden US, Hebert AE, Eaton D, Redmond KC (2018) A systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic versus open and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery approaches for lobectomy. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 28(4):526–534

Specialised Commissioning Team (2016) Clinical commissioning policy: robotic assisted lung resection for primary lung cancer. NHS England, Leeds, UK

Deen SA, Wilson JL, Wilshire CL, Vallieres E, Farivar AS, Aye RW et al (2014) Defining the cost of care for lobectomy and segmentectomy: a comparison of open, video-assisted thoracoscopic, and robotic approaches. Ann Thorac Surg 97(3):1000–1007

Singer E, Kneuertz PJ, D’Souza DM, Moffatt-Bruce SD, Merritt RE (2019) Understanding the financial cost of robotic lobectomy: calculating the value of innovation? Ann Cardiothorac Surg 8(2):194–201

Diana M, Marescaux J (2015) Robotic surgery. Br J Surg 102(2):e15-28

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ 339:b2535

Personal Communication with Healthcare Pricing Office, Health Services Executive

Department of Health. Consolodated salary scales in accordance with FEMPI 2015 and the public service stability agreements 2013–2020 (The Lansdowne Road Agreements). [Internet]. 2018. https://healthservice.hse.ie/filelibrary/staff/october-2018-consolidated-pay-scales.pdf

Casali G, Walker WS (2009) Video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy: can we afford it? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 35(3):423–428

Piwkowski C, Gabryel P, Gałęcki B, Roszak M, Dyszkiewicz W (2013) High costs as a slow down factor of thoracoscopic lobectomy development in Poland—an institutional experience. Videosurg Other Miniinvas Tech 8:334

Ramos R, Masuet C, Fau-Gossot D, Gossot D (2012) Lobectomy for early-stage lung carcinoma: a cost analysis of full thoracoscopy versus posterolateral thoracotomy. Surg Endosc 26:431

Potter S, Davies C, Davies G, Rice C, Hollingworth W (2020) The use of micro-costing in economic analyses of surgical interventions: a systematic review. Heal Econ Rev 10(1):3

Moss EL, Morgan G, Martin A, Sarhanis P, Ind T (2021) Economic evaluation of different routes of surgery for the management of endometrial cancer: a retrospective cohort study. BMJ Open 11(5):e045888

Bastawrous AL, Brockhaus KK, Chang MI, Milky G, Shih IF, Li Y et al (2022) A national database propensity score-matched comparison of minimally invasive and open colectomy for long-term opioid use. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08338-9

Bijlani A, Hebert AE, Davitian M, May H, Speers M, Leung R et al (2016) A multidimensional analysis of prostate surgery costs in the united states: robotic-assisted versus retropubic radical prostatectomy. Value Health 19:391

Shkolyar E, Shih IF, Li Y, Wong JA, Liao JC (2020) Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy associated with decreased persistent postoperative opioid use. J Endourol 34:475