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

Melanie A Lindenberg; Valesca P Retèl; Henk G van der Poel; Ferdau Bandstra; Carl Wijburg; Wim H van Harten

doi:10.1038/s41598-022-10746-3

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

Melanie A Lindenberg, Valesca P Retèl, Henk G van der Poel, Ferdau Bandstra, Carl Wijburg, Wim H van Harten^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Health Technology Assessment (HTA)

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

16 Citations (Scopus)

18 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

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.

Original language	English
Article number	7658
Journal	Scientific Reports
Volume	12
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-10746-3
Publication status	Published - 10 May 2022

Bibliographical note

Funding
W.H. van Harten received funding from Intuitive surgical to continue and finish this study. The sponsor had no influence on the design of the study, the methodologies used and the results presented.

© 2022. The Author(s).

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1038/s41598-022-10746-3Licence: CC BY

s41598-022-10746-3Final published version, 1.01 MBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{884caa6f216d4e94b4a208a39cf577eb,

title = "Cost-utility analysis on robot-assisted and laparoscopic prostatectomy based on long-term functional outcomes",

abstract = "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.",

author = "Lindenberg, {Melanie A} and Ret{\`e}l, {Valesca P} and {van der Poel}, {Henk G} and Ferdau Bandstra and Carl Wijburg and {van Harten}, {Wim H}",

note = "Funding W.H. van Harten received funding from Intuitive surgical to continue and finish this study. The sponsor had no influence on the design of the study, the methodologies used and the results presented. {\textcopyright} 2022. The Author(s).",

year = "2022",

month = may,

day = "10",

doi = "10.1038/s41598-022-10746-3",

language = "English",

volume = "12",

journal = "Scientific Reports",

issn = "2045-2322",

publisher = "Nature Publishing Group",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-utility analysis on robot-assisted and laparoscopic prostatectomy based on long-term functional outcomes

AU - Lindenberg, Melanie A

AU - Retèl, Valesca P

AU - van der Poel, Henk G

AU - Bandstra, Ferdau

AU - Wijburg, Carl

AU - van Harten, Wim H

N1 - Funding W.H. van Harten received funding from Intuitive surgical to continue and finish this study. The sponsor had no influence on the design of the study, the methodologies used and the results presented. © 2022. The Author(s).

PY - 2022/5/10

Y1 - 2022/5/10

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85129876177&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1038/s41598-022-10746-3

DO - 10.1038/s41598-022-10746-3

M3 - Article

C2 - 35538174

SN - 2045-2322

VL - 12

JO - Scientific Reports

JF - Scientific Reports

IS - 1

M1 - 7658

ER -

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

Abstract

Bibliographical note

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this