Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA.
MEDCIDS - Department of Community Medicine, Information and Health Decision Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Neurosurgery. 2022 Feb 1;90(2):192-198. doi: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000001779.
Management of degenerative disease of the spine has evolved to favor minimally invasive techniques, including nonrobotic-assisted and robotic-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). Value-based spending is being increasingly implemented to control rising costs in the US healthcare system. With an aging population, it is fundamental to understand which procedure(s) may be most cost-effective.
To compare robotic and nonrobotic MIS-TLIF through a cost-utility analysis.
We considered direct medical costs related to surgical intervention and to the hospital stay, as well as 1-yr utilities. We estimated costs by assessing all cases involving adults undergoing robotic surgery at a single institution and an equal number of patients undergoing nonrobotic surgery, matched by demographic and clinical characteristics. We adopted a willingness to pay of $50 000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Uncertainty was addressed by deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.
Costs were estimated based on a total of 76 patients, including 38 undergoing robot-assisted and 38 matched patients undergoing nonrobot MIS-TLIF. Using point estimates, robotic surgery was projected to cost $21 546.80 and to be associated with 0.68 QALY, and nonrobotic surgery was projected to cost $22 398.98 and to be associated with 0.67 QALY. Robotic surgery was found to be more cost-effective strategy, with cost-effectiveness being sensitive operating room/materials and room costs. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis identified robotic surgery as cost-effective in 63% of simulations.
Our results suggest that at a willingness to pay of $50 000/QALY, robotic-assisted MIS-TLIF was cost-effective in 63% of simulations. Cost-effectiveness depends on operating room and room (admission) costs, with potentially different results under distinct neurosurgical practices.
脊柱退行性疾病的治疗已发展为偏向微创技术,包括非机器人辅助和机器人辅助微创经椎间孔腰椎间融合术(MIS-TLIF)。为了控制美国医疗保健系统不断上涨的成本,基于价值的支出正被越来越多地采用。随着人口老龄化,了解哪种手术(或联合手术)可能最具成本效益至关重要。
通过成本-效用分析比较机器人辅助和非机器人辅助 MIS-TLIF。
我们考虑了与手术干预和住院相关的直接医疗成本,以及 1 年效用。我们通过评估在一家机构接受机器人手术的所有成年患者以及接受非机器人手术的匹配患者来估计成本,这些患者的人口统计学和临床特征相匹配。我们采用愿意支付 50000 美元/质量调整生命年(QALY)的方法。通过确定性和概率敏感性分析来解决不确定性。
根据总共 76 名患者的情况估算了成本,其中 38 名患者接受了机器人辅助手术,38 名匹配患者接受了非机器人辅助 MIS-TLIF。采用点估计值,机器人手术预计花费 21546.80 美元,与 0.68 QALY 相关,而非机器人手术预计花费 22398.98 美元,与 0.67 QALY 相关。机器人手术被认为是更具成本效益的策略,成本效益对手术室/材料和房间成本敏感。概率敏感性分析确定在 63%的模拟中,机器人手术具有成本效益。
我们的结果表明,在愿意支付 50000 美元/QALY 的情况下,机器人辅助 MIS-TLIF 在 63%的模拟中具有成本效益。成本效益取决于手术室和房间(入院)成本,在不同的神经外科实践中有潜在的不同结果。