Robotic Lobectomy Is Cost-effective and Provides Comparable Health Utility Scores to Video-assisted Lobectomy

Author:

Patel Yogita S.1,Baste Jean-Marc2,Shargall Yaron1,Waddell Thomas K.3,Yasufuku Kazuhiro3,Machuca Tiago N.4,Xie Feng5,Thabane Lehana5,Hanna Waël C.1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Surgery, Division of Thoracic Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

2. Department of Surgery, Division of Thoracic Surgery, Rouen Normandy University, Rouen Cedex, France

3. Department of Surgery, Division of Thoracic Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

4. Department of Surgery, Division of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL

5. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine if robotic-assisted lobectomy (RPL-4) is cost-effective and offers improved patient-reported health utility for patients with early-stage non–small cell lung cancer when compared with video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy (VATS-lobectomy). Background: Barriers against the adoption of RPL-4 in publicly funded health care include the paucity of high-quality prospective trials and the perceived high cost of robotic surgery. Methods: Patients were enrolled in a blinded, multicentered, randomized controlled trial in Canada, the United States, and France, and were randomized 1:1 to either RPL-4 or VATS-lobectomy. EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level (EQ-5D-5L) was administered at baseline and postoperative day 1; weeks 3, 7, 12; and months 6 and 12. Direct and indirect costs were tracked using standard methods. Seemingly Unrelated Regression was applied to estimate the cost effect, adjusting for baseline health utility. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was generated by 10,000 bootstrap samples with multivariate imputation by chained equations. Results: Of 406 patients screened, 186 were randomized, and 164 analyzed after the final eligibility review (RPL-4: n=81; VATS-lobectomy: n=83). Twelve-month follow-up was completed by 94.51% (155/164) of participants. The median age was 68 (60–74). There were no significant differences in body mass index, comorbidity, pulmonary function, smoking status, baseline health utility, or tumor characteristics between arms. The mean 12-week health utility score was 0.85 (0.10) for RPL-4 and 0.80 (0.19) for VATS-lobectomy (P=0.02). Significantly more lymph nodes were sampled [10 (8–13) vs 8 (5–10); P=0.003] in the RPL-4 arm. The incremental cost/quality-adjusted life year of RPL-4 was $14,925.62 (95% CI: $6843.69, $23,007.56) at 12 months. Conclusion: Early results of the RAVAL trial suggest that RPL-4 is cost-effective and associated with comparable short-term patient-reported health utility scores when compared with VATS-lobectomy.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Surgery

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3