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

BMC Health Services Research

Enea Parimbelli¹  Silvana Quaglini¹  Christian Simon²  Lorry Duchoud²  Gian Luca Armas²  Federico Soldati²  Martina Broglie³  John de Almeida⁴ 

[1] Department of Electrical, Computer and Biomedical Engineering, University of Pavia;Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Centre Universitaire Hospitalier Vaudois, University of Lausanne;Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Universitätsspital Zürich, University Hospital Zurich;Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre- University Health Network, University of Toronto;

关键词: Cost-utility;    Transoral laser microsurgery;    Transoral robotic surgery;    Head and neck cancer;    Oropharyngeal cancer;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12913-021-07149-x

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

Abstract Background 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. Methods 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. Results 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. Conclusion 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.

【 授权许可】

Unknown