Cost-utility of two minimally-invasive surgical techniques for operable oropharyngeal cancer: transoral robotic surgery versus transoral laser microsurgery.

Details

Ressource 1Download: 34711226_BIB_8E541188161A.pdf (1106.80 [Ko])
State: Public
Version: Final published version
License: CC BY 4.0
Serval ID
serval:BIB_8E541188161A
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Cost-utility of two minimally-invasive surgical techniques for operable oropharyngeal cancer: transoral robotic surgery versus transoral laser microsurgery.
Journal
BMC health services research
Author(s)
Parimbelli E., Soldati F., Duchoud L., Armas G.L., de Almeida J., Broglie M., Quaglini S., Simon C.
ISSN
1472-6963 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
1472-6963
Publication state
Published
Issued date
29/10/2021
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
21
Number
1
Pages
1173
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article
Publication Status: epublish
Abstract
In the past few decades, a re-evaluation of treatment paradigms of head and neck cancers with a desire to spare patients the treatment-related toxicities of open surgery, has led to the development of new minimally invasive surgical techniques to improve outcomes. Besides Transoral Laser Microsurgery (TLM), a new robotic surgical technique namely Transoral Robotic Surgery (TORS) emerged for the first time as one of the two most prominent and widely used minimally invasive surgical approaches particularly for the treatment of oropharyngeal cancer, a sub-entity of head and neck cancers. Recent population-level data suggest equivalent tumor control, but different total costs, and need for adjuvant chemoradiation. A comparative analysis of these two techniques is therefore warranted from the cost-utility (C/U) point of view.
A cost-utility analysis for comparing TORS and TLM was performed using a decision-analytical model. The analyses adopted the perspective of a Swiss hospital. Two tertiary referral centers in Lausanne and Zurich provided data for model quantificantion.
In the base case analysis TLM dominates TORS. This advantage remains robust, even if the costs for TORS reduce by up to 25%. TORS begins to dominate TLM, if less than 59,7% patients require adjuvant treatment, whereby in an interval between 55 and 62% cost effectiveness of TORS is sensitive to the prescription of adjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT). Exceeding 29% of TLM patients requiring a revision of surgical margins renders TORS more cost-effective.
Non-robotic endoscopic surgery (TLM) is more cost-effective than robotic endoscopic surgery (TORS) for the treatment of oropharyngeal cancers. However, this advantage is sensitive to various parameters, i.e.to the number of re-operations and adjuvant treatment.
Keywords
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell, Humans, Lasers, Microsurgery, Oropharyngeal Neoplasms/surgery, Robotic Surgical Procedures, Treatment Outcome, Cost-utility, Head and neck cancer, Oropharyngeal cancer, Transoral laser microsurgery, Transoral robotic surgery
Pubmed
Web of science
Open Access
Yes
Create date
04/11/2021 16:05
Last modification date
12/01/2022 7:11
Usage data