Systematic review and meta-analysis of cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive versus open pancreatic resections

被引:8
作者
Lee, Suhyun [1 ]
Varghese, Chris [2 ]
Fung, Matthew [1 ]
Patel, Bijendra [3 ,4 ]
Pandanaboyana, Sanjay [5 ,6 ]
Dasari, Bobby V. M. [7 ,8 ]
机构
[1] Univ Manchester, Manchester, England
[2] Univ Auckland, Fac Med & Hlth Sci, Dept Surg, Auckland, New Zealand
[3] Barts & London Queen Marys Sch Med & Dent, Inst Canc, London, England
[4] Queen Mary Univ London, London, England
[5] Freeman Rd Hosp, HPB & Transplant Unit, Newcastle Upon Tyne, England
[6] Newcastle Univ, Populat Hlth Sci Inst, Newcastle Upon Tyne, England
[7] Queen Elizabeth Hosp, Dept HBP & Liver Transplant Surg, Birmingham B15 2TH, England
[8] Univ Birmingham, Inst Immunol & Immunotherapy, Birmingham, England
关键词
Cost; Pancreatic resection; Open surgery; Minimally invasive surgery; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; LAPAROSCOPIC DISTAL PANCREATECTOMY; CLINICAL-OUTCOMES; PANCREATICODUODENECTOMY; LESIONS; BENIGN;
D O I
10.1007/s00423-023-03017-w
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
BackgroundThe systematic review is aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open distal pancreatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy.MethodThe MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, and clinical trial registries were systematically searched using the PRISMA framework. Studies of adults aged & GE; 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.ResultsTwenty-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; I-2 = 91%; P = 0.001), equipment (SMD 3.73; 95% CI 1.55 to 5.91; I-2 = 98%; P = 0.0008), and operating room occupation (SMD 1.17, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.24; I-2 = 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; I-2 = 80%; P = 0.17). There was significant heterogeneity among the studies.ConclusionMinimally invasive major pancreatic surgery entailed higher intraoperative but similar overall index hospitalisation costs.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 57 条
[1]   Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy: a clinical and cost-effectiveness study [J].
Abu Hilal, Mohammad ;
Hamdan, Mohammed ;
Di Fabio, Francesco ;
Pearce, Neil W. ;
Johnson, Colin D. .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2012, 26 (06) :1670-1674
[2]   Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: comparison of complications and cost to the open approach [J].
Baker, E. H. ;
Ross, S. W. ;
Seshadri, R. ;
Swan, R. Z. ;
Iannitti, D. A. ;
Vrochides, D. ;
Martinie, J. B. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ROBOTICS AND COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY, 2016, 12 (03) :554-560
[3]   New Technology and Health Care Costs - The Case of Robot-Assisted Surgery [J].
Barbash, Gabriel I. ;
Glied, Sherry A. .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2010, 363 (08) :701-704
[4]   Cost Comparison of Robotic, Laparoscopic, and Open Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer [J].
Bolenz, Christian ;
Gupta, Amit ;
Hotze, Timothy ;
Ho, Richard ;
Cadeddu, Jeffrey A. ;
Roehrborn, Claus G. ;
Lotan, Yair .
EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2010, 57 (03) :453-458
[5]   Results of 100 consecutive laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies: postoperative outcome, cost-benefit analysis, and quality of life assessment [J].
Braga, Marco ;
Pecorelli, Nicolo ;
Ferrari, Denise ;
Balzano, Gianpaolo ;
Zuliani, Walter ;
Castoldi, Renato .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2015, 29 (07) :1871-1878
[6]   Systematic Review of Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Resection [J].
Briggs, Christopher D. ;
Mann, Christopher D. ;
Irving, Glen R. B. ;
Neal, Christopher P. ;
Peterson, Mark ;
Cameron, Iain C. ;
Berry, David P. .
JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY, 2009, 13 (06) :1129-1137
[7]   Outcomes following pancreatic resectionsresults and challenges of an Austrian university hospital compared to nationwide data and international centres [J].
Cardini, Benno ;
Primavesi, Florian ;
Maglione, Manuel ;
Oberschmied, Julia ;
Guschlbauer, Luisa ;
Gasteiger, Silvia ;
Kuscher, Stefanie ;
Resch, Thomas ;
Oberhuber, Rupert ;
Margreiter, Christian ;
Schneeberger, Stefan ;
Oefner, Dietmar ;
Staettner, Stefan .
EUROPEAN SURGERY-ACTA CHIRURGICA AUSTRIACA, 2019, 51 (03) :81-89
[8]   Estimation of the Acquisition and Operating Costs for Robotic Surgery [J].
Childers, Christopher P. ;
Maggard-Gibbons, Melinda .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2018, 320 (08) :835-836
[9]   Minimally Invasive Versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy (LEOPARD) A Multicenter Patient-blinded Randomized Controlled Trial [J].
de Rooij, Thijs ;
van Hilst, Jony ;
van Santvoort, Hjalmar ;
Boerma, Djamila ;
van den Boezem, Peter ;
Daams, Freek ;
van Dam, Ronald ;
Dejong, Cees ;
van Duyn, Eino ;
Dijkgraaf, Marcel ;
van Eijck, Casper ;
Festen, Sebastiaan ;
Gerhards, Michael ;
Koerkamp, Bas Groot ;
de Hingh, Ignace ;
Kazemier, Geert ;
Klaase, Joost ;
de Kleine, Ruben ;
van Laarhoven, Cornelis ;
Luyer, Misha ;
Patijn, Gijs ;
Steenvoorde, Pascal ;
Suker, Mustafa ;
Abu Hilal, Moh'd ;
Busch, Olivier ;
Besselink, Marc .
ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2019, 269 (01) :2-9
[10]   Clinical outcomes compared between laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy [J].
Eom, B. W. ;
Jang, J. -Y. ;
Lee, S. E. ;
Han, H. -S. ;
Yoon, Y. -S. ;
Kim, S. -W. .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2008, 22 (05) :1334-1338