Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Background This study analyzed the Quality of Life (QoL) and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic (LDP) versus robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP). Methods Consecutive patients submitted to LDP or RDP from 2010 to 2020 in four high-volume Italian centers were included, with a minimum of 12 months of postoperative follow-up were included. QoL was evaluated using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D questionnaires, self-reported by patients. After a propensity score matching, which included BMI, gender, operation time, multiorgan and vascular resections, splenic preservation, and pancreatic stump management, the mean differential cost and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY) were calculated and plotted on a cost-utility plane. Results The study population consisted of 564 patients. Among these, 271 (49%) patients were submitted to LDP, while 293 (51%) patients to RDP. After propensity score matching, the study population was composed of 159 patients in each group, with a median follow-up of 59 months. As regards the QoL analysis, global health and emotional functioning domains showed better results in the RDP group ( p = 0.037 and p = 0.026, respectively), whereas the other did not differ. As expected, the median crude costs analysis confirmed that RDP was more expensive than LDP (16,041 Euros vs. 10,335 Euros, p < 0.001). However, the robotic approach had a higher probability of being more cost-effective than the laparoscopic procedure when a willingness to pay more than 5697 Euros/QALY was accepted. Conclusion RDP was associated with better QoL as explored by specific domains. Crude costs were higher for RDP, and the cost-effectiveness threshold was set at 5697 euros/QALY.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Matteo De Pastena
Alessandro Esposito
Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori
Salvatore Paiella
Surgical Endoscopy
University of Padua
University of Verona
University of Brescia
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Pastena et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/68e5b8a1b6db6435875513b5 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-10849-0