Objectives The purpose of this study was to compare the costs of traditional laparoscopy and robotic-assisted laparoscopy in the treatment of endometrial cancer.
Methods and Materials A total of 101 patients with endometrial cancer were randomized to the study and operated on starting from 2010 until 2013, at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland. Costs were calculated based on internal accounting, hospital database, and purchase prices and were compared using intention-to-treat analysis. Main outcome measures were item costs and total costs related to the operation, including a 6-month postoperative follow-up.
Results The total costs including late complications were 2160 &OV0556; higher in the robotic group (median for traditional 5823 &OV0556;, vs robot median 7983 &OV0556;, P < 0.001). The difference was due to higher costs for instruments and equipment as well as to more expensive operating room and postanesthesia care unit time. Traditional laparoscopy involved higher costs for operation personnel, general costs, medication used in the operation, and surgeon, although these costs were not substantial. There was no significant difference in in-patient stay, laboratory, radiology, blood products, or costs related to complications.
Conclusions According to this study, robotic-assisted laparoscopy is 37% more expensive than traditional laparoscopy in the treatment of endometrial cancer. The cost difference is mainly explained by amortization of the robot and its instrumentation.
- Robotic-assisted surgery
- Endometrial cancer
- Cost analysis
- Gynecologic oncology
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
No funding was obtained for this study.
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Riikka-Liisa K. Vuorinen, MD, and Minna M. Mäenpää, MD, equally contributed to the study.
Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citation appears in the printed text and is provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal’s Web site (www.ijgc.net).