Background The cost-effectiveness of a laparoscopic (LPD) and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD), compared with the open approach (OPD), is still under debate. Methods A Markov decision model was developed to compare OPD, LPD, and RPD. The healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated by calculating the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per QALY gained. A willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $130,049 was assumed as the threshold. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was performed to reflect the uncertainty of various parameters. Results In the base case scenario, LPD and RPD were associated with increased costs of US $30,047 and US $30,822, respectively, leading to an ICER of US $-3,911,669 and US $-1,164,992 per QALY. When comparing LPD with OPD, three main factors influence the model: OPD costs (68.8 %), LPD costs (27.9 %), and the complication rate after LPD (2.3 %). In comparing RPD with OPD, two main factors affect the model: RPD costs (75.2 %) and OPD costs (23.3 %). PSA analysis confirmed that OPD was the most cost-effective choice in most cases (62.6 %), while RPD and LPD were the most cost-effective procedures in 26.2 % and 11.9 %, respectively. Conclusion The RDP and LPD were not cost-effective. OPD remained the best approach.

Ricci, C., Alberici, L., D'Ambra, V., Ingaldi, C., Fichera, M., Casadei, R. (2025). The “Big short” of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. A cost-effectiveness analysis based on randomized trials. HPB, 28(1), 78-88 [10.1016/j.hpb.2025.10.014].

The “Big short” of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. A cost-effectiveness analysis based on randomized trials

Ricci, Claudio
Primo
;
Alberici, Laura
Secondo
;
D'Ambra, Vincenzo;Ingaldi, Carlo;Fichera, Marco;Casadei, Riccardo
Ultimo
2025

Abstract

Background The cost-effectiveness of a laparoscopic (LPD) and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD), compared with the open approach (OPD), is still under debate. Methods A Markov decision model was developed to compare OPD, LPD, and RPD. The healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated by calculating the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per QALY gained. A willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $130,049 was assumed as the threshold. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was performed to reflect the uncertainty of various parameters. Results In the base case scenario, LPD and RPD were associated with increased costs of US $30,047 and US $30,822, respectively, leading to an ICER of US $-3,911,669 and US $-1,164,992 per QALY. When comparing LPD with OPD, three main factors influence the model: OPD costs (68.8 %), LPD costs (27.9 %), and the complication rate after LPD (2.3 %). In comparing RPD with OPD, two main factors affect the model: RPD costs (75.2 %) and OPD costs (23.3 %). PSA analysis confirmed that OPD was the most cost-effective choice in most cases (62.6 %), while RPD and LPD were the most cost-effective procedures in 26.2 % and 11.9 %, respectively. Conclusion The RDP and LPD were not cost-effective. OPD remained the best approach.
2025
HPB
Ricci, C., Alberici, L., D'Ambra, V., Ingaldi, C., Fichera, M., Casadei, R. (2025). The “Big short” of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. A cost-effectiveness analysis based on randomized trials. HPB, 28(1), 78-88 [10.1016/j.hpb.2025.10.014].
Ricci, Claudio; Alberici, Laura; D'Ambra, Vincenzo; Ingaldi, Carlo; Fichera, Marco; Casadei, Riccardo
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
1-s2.0-S1365182X25016776-main.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipo: Versione (PDF) editoriale / Version Of Record
Licenza: Licenza per Accesso Aperto. Creative Commons Attribuzione (CCBY)
Dimensione 2 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
2 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
1-s2.0-S1365182X25016776-mmc1.docx

accesso aperto

Tipo: File Supplementare
Licenza: Licenza per Accesso Aperto. Creative Commons Attribuzione (CCBY)
Dimensione 15.37 kB
Formato Microsoft Word XML
15.37 kB Microsoft Word XML Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/1040325
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
  • OpenAlex ND
social impact