Cost-utility analysis on robot-assisted and laparoscopic prostatectomy based on long-term functional outcomes.

Autor: Lindenberg MA; Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.; Department of Health Technology and Services Research, University of Twente, MB-HTSR, PO Box 217, 7500, Enschede, The Netherlands., Retèl VP; Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.; Department of Health Technology and Services Research, University of Twente, MB-HTSR, PO Box 217, 7500, Enschede, The Netherlands., van der Poel HG; Department of Urology, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands., Bandstra F; Vrije Universiteit (VU), Amsterdam, The Netherlands., Wijburg C; Department of Urology Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands., van Harten WH; Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. w.v.harten@nki.nl.; Department of Health Technology and Services Research, University of Twente, MB-HTSR, PO Box 217, 7500, Enschede, The Netherlands. w.v.harten@nki.nl.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Scientific reports [Sci Rep] 2022 May 10; Vol. 12 (1), pp. 7658. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 May 10.
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-10746-3
Abstrakt: Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP) is one of the standard treatment options for prostate cancer. However, controversy still exists on its added value. Based on a recent large-sample retrospective cluster study from the Netherlands showing significantly improved long-term urinary functioning after RARP compared to Laparoscopic RP (LRP), we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of RARP compared to LRP. A decision tree was constructed to measure the costs and effects from a Dutch societal perspective over a ~ 7 year time-horizon. The input was based on the aforementioned study, including patient-reported consumption of addition care and consumed care for ergonomic issues reported by surgeons. Intervention costs were calculated using a bottom-up costing analysis in 5 hospitals. Finally, a probabilistic-, one-way sensitivity- and scenario analyses were performed to show possible decision uncertainty. The intervention costs were €9964 for RARP and €7253 for LRP. Total trajectory costs were €12,078 for RARP and €10,049 for LRP. RARP showed higher QALYs compared to LRP (6.17 vs 6.11). The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was €34,206 per QALY gained, in favour of RARP. As a best-case scenario, when RARP is being centralized (> 150 cases/year), total trajectory costs decreased to €10,377 having a higher utilization, and a shorter procedure time and length of stay resulting in an ICUR of €3495 per QALY gained. RARP showed to be cost-effective compared to LRP based on data from a population-based, large scale study with 7 years of follow-up. This is a clear incentive to fully reimburse RARP, especially when hospitals provide RARP centralized.
(© 2022. The Author(s).)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje