Background: The cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is still a matter of debate. This study compares the cost-effectiveness of open (ODP), laparoscopic (LDP) and robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP). Methods: Pubmed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases were searched. Studies comparing cost-effectiveness of ODP and MIDP were included. Results: A total of 1052 titles were screened and 16 articles were included in the study, 2431 patients in total. LDP resulted the most cost-efficient procedure, with a mean total cost of 14,682 ± 5665 € and the lowest readmission rates. ODP had lower surgical procedure costs, 3867 ± 768 €. RDP was the safest approach regarding hospital stay costs (5239 ± 1741 €), length of hospital stay, morbidity, clinically relevant pancreatic fistula and reoperations. Conclusion: In this meta-analysis MIDP resulted as the most cost-effective approach. LDP seems to be protective against high costs, but RDP seems to be safer.

Evaluation of cost-effectiveness among open, laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Ricci C.;Ingaldi C.;Crippa S.;Alberici L.;Casadei R.;
2021

Abstract

Background: The cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is still a matter of debate. This study compares the cost-effectiveness of open (ODP), laparoscopic (LDP) and robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP). Methods: Pubmed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases were searched. Studies comparing cost-effectiveness of ODP and MIDP were included. Results: A total of 1052 titles were screened and 16 articles were included in the study, 2431 patients in total. LDP resulted the most cost-efficient procedure, with a mean total cost of 14,682 ± 5665 € and the lowest readmission rates. ODP had lower surgical procedure costs, 3867 ± 768 €. RDP was the safest approach regarding hospital stay costs (5239 ± 1741 €), length of hospital stay, morbidity, clinically relevant pancreatic fistula and reoperations. Conclusion: In this meta-analysis MIDP resulted as the most cost-effective approach. LDP seems to be protective against high costs, but RDP seems to be safer.
Partelli S.; Ricci C.; Cinelli L.; Montorsi R.M.; Ingaldi C.; Andreasi V.; Crippa S.; Alberici L.; Casadei R.; Falconi M.
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

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/11585/857813
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 2
  • Scopus 3
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 3
social impact