The Feasibility of Societal Cost Equivalence between Robotic Hysterectomy and Alternate HysterectomyMethods for Endometrial Cancer
被引:25
作者:
Shah, Neel T.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Brigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Minimally Invas Gynecol Surg, Boston, MA 02115 USA
Harvard Med Sch, Boston, MA 02115 USABrigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Minimally Invas Gynecol Surg, Boston, MA 02115 USA
Shah, Neel T.
[1
,2
]
Wright, Kelly N.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Brigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Minimally Invas Gynecol Surg, Boston, MA 02115 USA
Harvard Med Sch, Boston, MA 02115 USABrigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Minimally Invas Gynecol Surg, Boston, MA 02115 USA
Wright, Kelly N.
[1
,2
]
Jonsdottir, Gudrun M.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Brigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Minimally Invas Gynecol Surg, Boston, MA 02115 USABrigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Minimally Invas Gynecol Surg, Boston, MA 02115 USA
Jonsdottir, Gudrun M.
[1
]
Jorgensen, Selena
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Harvard Med Sch, Boston, MA 02115 USABrigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Minimally Invas Gynecol Surg, Boston, MA 02115 USA
Jorgensen, Selena
[2
]
Einarsson, Jon I.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Brigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Minimally Invas Gynecol Surg, Boston, MA 02115 USA
Harvard Med Sch, Boston, MA 02115 USABrigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Minimally Invas Gynecol Surg, Boston, MA 02115 USA
Einarsson, Jon I.
[1
,2
]
Muto, Michael G.
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Harvard Med Sch, Boston, MA 02115 USA
Brigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Gynecol Oncol, Boston, MA 02115 USABrigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Minimally Invas Gynecol Surg, Boston, MA 02115 USA
Muto, Michael G.
[2
,3
]
机构:
[1] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Minimally Invas Gynecol Surg, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] Harvard Med Sch, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[3] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Gynecol Oncol, Boston, MA 02115 USA
Objectives. We assess whether it is feasible for robotic hysterectomy for endometrial cancer to be less expensive to society than traditional laparoscopic hysterectomy or abdominal hysterectomy. Methods. We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of patient characteristics, operative times, complications, and hospital charges from all (n = 234) endometrial cancer patients who underwent hysterectomy in 2009 at our hospital. Per patient costs of each hysterectomy method were examined from the societal perspective. Sensitivity analysis andMonte Carlo simulation were performed using a cost-minimizationmodel. Results. 40 (17.1%) of hysterectomies for endometrial cancer were robotic, 91 (38.9%), were abdominal, and 103 (44.0%) were laparoscopic. 96.3% of the variation in operative cost between patients was predicted by operative time (R = 0.963, P < 0.01). Mean operative time for robotic hysterectomy was significantly longer than other methods (P < 0.01). Abdominal hysterectomy was consistently the most expensive while the traditional laparoscopic approach was consistently least expensive. The threshold in operative time that makes robotic hysterectomy cost equivalent to the abdominal approach is within the range of our experience. Conclusion. It is feasible for robotic hysterectomy to be less expensive than abdominal hysterectomy, but unlikely for robotic hysterectomy to be less expensive than traditional laparoscopy.