» Articles » PMID: 36422812

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Revisional Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Laparoscopic Vs. Robot Assisted

Overview
Journal Updates Surg
Specialty General Surgery
Date 2022 Nov 24
PMID 36422812
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

There is controversy over the possible advantages of the robotic technology in revisional bariatric surgery. The aim of this study is to report the experience of a high-volume bariatric center on revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with robot-assisted (R-rRYGB) and laparoscopic (L-rRYGB) approaches, with regards to operative outcomes and costs. Patients who underwent R-rRYGB and L-rRYGB between 2008 and 2021 were included. Patients' baseline characteristics and perioperative data were recorded. The primary endpoint was the overall postoperative morbidity. A full economic evaluation was performed. One-way and two-way sensitivity analyses were performed on laparoscopic anastomotic leak and reoperation rates. A total of 194 patients were included: 44 (22.7%) L-rRYGB and 150 (77.3%) R-rRYGB. The robotic approach was associated with lower overall complication rate (10% vs. 22.7%, p = 0.038), longer operative time, and a reduced length of stay compared to L-rRYGB. R-rRYGB was more expensive than L-rRYGB (mean difference 2401.1€, p < 0.001). The incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER) was 18,906.3€/complication and the incremental cost-utility ratio was 48,022.0€/QALY (quality-adjusted life years), that is below the willingness-to-pay threshold. Decision tree analysis showed that L-rRYGB was the most cost-effective strategy in the base-case scenario; a probability of leak ≥ 13%, or a probability of reoperation ≥ 14% following L-rRYGB, or a 12.7% reduction in robotic costs would be required for R-rRYGB to become the most cost-effective strategy. R-rRYGB was associated with higher costs than L-rRYGB in our base-case scenario. However, it is an acceptable alternative from a cost-effectiveness perspective.

Citing Articles

Robotic versus laparoscopic revisional bariatric surgeries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ataya K, Bourji H, Bsat A, Al Ayoubi A, Al Jaafreh A, Abi Saad G J Minim Invasive Surg. 2023; 26(4):198-207.

PMID: 38098353 PMC: 10728689. DOI: 10.7602/jmis.2023.26.4.198.


Senhance Robotic Platform in Pediatrics: Early US Experience.

Puentes M, Rojnica M, Sims T, Jones R, Bianco F, Lobe T Children (Basel). 2023; 10(2).

PMID: 36832307 PMC: 9955020. DOI: 10.3390/children10020178.


Robot-assisted esophagectomy with robot-sewn intrathoracic anastomosis (Ivor Lewis): surgical technique and early results.

Marano A, Salomone S, Pellegrino L, Geretto P, Robella M, Borghi F Updates Surg. 2022; 75(4):941-952.

PMID: 36510101 PMC: 9744375. DOI: 10.1007/s13304-022-01439-7.

References
1.
Nasser H, Munie S, Kindel T, Gould J, Higgins R . Comparative analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic revisional bariatric surgery: perioperative outcomes from the MBSAQIP database. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2020; 16(3):397-405. DOI: 10.1016/j.soard.2019.11.018. View

2.
Campbell J, McGarry L, Shikora S, Hale B, Lee J, Weinstein M . Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic gastric banding and bypass for morbid obesity. Am J Manag Care. 2010; 16(7):e174-87. View

3.
Rebecchi F, Allaix M, Ugliono E, Giaccone C, Toppino M, Morino M . Increased Esophageal Exposure to Weakly Acidic Reflux 5 Years After Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass. Ann Surg. 2016; 264(5):871-877. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001775. View

4.
Bailey J, Hayden J, Davis P, Liu R, Haardt D, Ellsmere J . Robotic versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) in obese adults ages 18 to 65 years: a systematic review and economic analysis. Surg Endosc. 2013; 28(2):414-26. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-013-3217-8. View

5.
Rebecchi F, Ugliono E, Allaix M, Toppino M, Borello A, Morino M . Robotic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass as a Revisional Bariatric Procedure: a Single-Center Prospective Cohort Study. Obes Surg. 2019; 30(1):11-17. DOI: 10.1007/s11695-019-04117-7. View