Economic analysis of open versus laparoscopic versus robot-assisted versus transanal total mesorectal excision in rectal cancer patients: A systematic review

• Published in: PloS one 2023-07, Vol.18 (7), p.e0289090-e0289090
• Main Authors: Geitenbeek, Ritchie T J, Burghgraef, Thijs A, Broekman, Mark, Schop, Bram P A, Lieverse, Tom G F, Hompes, Roel, Havenga, Klaas, Postma, Maarten J, Consten, Esther C J
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Analysis; Biology and Life Sciences; Cancer; Cancer patients; Care and treatment; Colorectal cancer; Cost assessments; Costs; Demographics; Diagnosis; Economic analysis; Economic aspects; Evaluation; Health aspects; Heterogeneity; Hospitalization; Humans; Invasiveness; Laparoscopic surgery; Laparoscopy; Laparoscopy - adverse effects; Learning curves; Literature reviews; Medical care, Cost of; Medicine and Health Sciences; Meta-analysis; Patients; People and Places; Postoperative Complications - etiology; Postoperative period; Proctectomy - methods; Quality assessment; Quality control; Rectal Neoplasms - complications; Rectal Neoplasms - surgery; Rectum; Rectum - surgery; Research and Analysis Methods; Robotic surgery; Robotics; Robots; Social Sciences; Standard deviation; Statistical methods; Surgeons; Surgery; Systematic review; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery - adverse effects; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery - methods; Treatment Outcome
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0289090

Minimally invasive total mesorectal excision is increasingly being used as an alternative to open surgery in the treatment of patients with rectal cancer. This systematic review aimed to compare the total, operative and hospitalization costs of open, laparoscopic, robot-assisted and transanal total mesorectal excision. This systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement (PRISMA) (S1 File) A literature review was conducted (end-of-search date: January 1, 2023) and quality assessment performed using the Consensus Health Economic Criteria. 12 studies were included, reporting on 2542 patients (226 open, 1192 laparoscopic, 998 robot-assisted and 126 transanal total mesorectal excision). Total costs of minimally invasive total mesorectal excision were higher compared to the open technique in the majority of included studies. For robot-assisted total mesorectal excision, higher operative costs and lower hospitalization costs were reported compared to the open and laparoscopic technique. A meta-analysis could not be performed due to low study quality and a high level of heterogeneity. Heterogeneity was caused by differences in the learning curve and statistical methods used. Literature regarding costs of total mesorectal excision techniques is limited in quality and number. Available evidence suggests minimally invasive techniques may be more expensive compared to open total mesorectal excision. High-quality economical evaluations, accounting for the learning curve, are needed to properly assess costs of the different techniques.