Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Costs and quality of life in a randomized trial comparing minimally invasive and open distal pancreatectomy (LEOPARD trial)
View through CrossRef
Abstract
Background
Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy decreases time to functional recovery compared with open distal pancreatectomy, but the cost-effectiveness and impact on disease-specific quality of life have yet to be established.
Methods
The LEOPARD trial randomized patients to minimally invasive (robot-assisted or laparoscopic) or open distal pancreatectomy in 14 Dutch centres between April 2015 and March 2017. Use of hospital healthcare resources, complications and disease-specific quality of life were recorded up to 1 year after surgery. Unit costs of hospital healthcare resources were determined, and cost-effectiveness and cost–utility analyses were performed. Primary outcomes were the costs per day earlier functional recovery and per quality-adjusted life-year.
Results
All 104 patients who had a distal pancreatectomy (48 minimally invasive and 56 open) in the trial were included in this study. Patients who underwent a robot-assisted procedure were excluded from the cost analysis. Total medical costs were comparable after laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy (mean difference €–427 (95 per cent bias-corrected and accelerated confidence interval €–4700 to 3613; P = 0·839). Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was shown to have a probability of at least 0·566 of being more cost-effective than the open approach at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €0 per day of earlier recovery, and a probability of 0·676 per additional quality-adjusted life-year at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €80 000. There were no significant differences in cosmetic satisfaction scores (median 9 (i.q.r. 5·75–10) versus 7 (4–8·75); P = 0·056) and disease-specific quality of life after minimally invasive (laparoscopic and robot-assisted procedures) versus open distal pancreatectomy.
Conclusion
Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was at least as cost-effective as open distal pancreatectomy in terms of time to functional recovery and quality-adjusted life-years. Cosmesis and quality of life were similar in the two groups 1 year after surgery.
Oxford University Press (OUP)
J van Hilst
E A Strating
T de Rooij
F Daams
S Festen
B Groot Koerkamp
J M Klaase
M Luyer
M G Dijkgraaf
M G Besselink
H C van Santvoort
M T de Boer
D Boerma
P B van den Boezem
R M van Dam
C H Dejong
E B van Duyn
C H van Eijck
M F Gerhards
I H de Hingh
G Kazemier
R H de Kleine
C J van Laarhoven
G A Patijn
P Steenvoorde
M Suker
M Abu Hilal
Title: Costs and quality of life in a randomized trial comparing minimally invasive and open distal pancreatectomy (LEOPARD trial)
Description:
Abstract
Background
Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy decreases time to functional recovery compared with open distal pancreatectomy, but the cost-effectiveness and impact on disease-specific quality of life have yet to be established.
Methods
The LEOPARD trial randomized patients to minimally invasive (robot-assisted or laparoscopic) or open distal pancreatectomy in 14 Dutch centres between April 2015 and March 2017.
Use of hospital healthcare resources, complications and disease-specific quality of life were recorded up to 1 year after surgery.
Unit costs of hospital healthcare resources were determined, and cost-effectiveness and cost–utility analyses were performed.
Primary outcomes were the costs per day earlier functional recovery and per quality-adjusted life-year.
Results
All 104 patients who had a distal pancreatectomy (48 minimally invasive and 56 open) in the trial were included in this study.
Patients who underwent a robot-assisted procedure were excluded from the cost analysis.
Total medical costs were comparable after laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy (mean difference €–427 (95 per cent bias-corrected and accelerated confidence interval €–4700 to 3613; P = 0·839).
Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was shown to have a probability of at least 0·566 of being more cost-effective than the open approach at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €0 per day of earlier recovery, and a probability of 0·676 per additional quality-adjusted life-year at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €80 000.
There were no significant differences in cosmetic satisfaction scores (median 9 (i.
q.
r.
5·75–10) versus 7 (4–8·75); P = 0·056) and disease-specific quality of life after minimally invasive (laparoscopic and robot-assisted procedures) versus open distal pancreatectomy.
Conclusion
Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was at least as cost-effective as open distal pancreatectomy in terms of time to functional recovery and quality-adjusted life-years.
Cosmesis and quality of life were similar in the two groups 1 year after surgery.
Related Results
Safety and Efficacy of Atezolizumab in Ovarian Cancer
Safety and Efficacy of Atezolizumab in Ovarian Cancer
Abstract
Introduction
Although the efficacy of PD-L1 blockade has been evaluated in analyses that combine pharmacologically distinct antibodies, the specific efficacy and safety of...
Does the Introduction of Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy Jeopardize Patient Safety and Well-Being?
Does the Introduction of Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy Jeopardize Patient Safety and Well-Being?
Background/Purpose:
Despite retrospective data indicating short-term superiority for laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy compared to open distal pancreatectomy, ...
Oncological outcomes in minimally invasive gastric cancer surgery
Oncological outcomes in minimally invasive gastric cancer surgery
In the first part of this dissertation an assessment was made on current available
evidence regarding outcomes in minimally invasive gastrectomy in comparison to open
gastrectomy. ...
HPB SO15 - Developing protocol for managing diabetes after Distal pancreatectomy
HPB SO15 - Developing protocol for managing diabetes after Distal pancreatectomy
Abstract
Background
The incidence of new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM) has been reported to be 18% to 39% after pancreaticoduod...
Minimally invasive approaches in pancreatic cancer surgery
Minimally invasive approaches in pancreatic cancer surgery
SummaryThis literature review reflects the present evidence on minimally invasive pancreatic surgery, differentiating between distal pancreatic resection and pancreatoduodenectomy ...
Application of DNA forensic to identify a problem leopard and its implications for human-leopard conflict mitigation
Application of DNA forensic to identify a problem leopard and its implications for human-leopard conflict mitigation
Abstract
Attacks on humans by leopards
Panthera pardus
often escalate human-leopard conflict, influence extre...
ADVANCES AND CHALLENGES IN MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY FOR THE TREATMENT OF HERNIAS
ADVANCES AND CHALLENGES IN MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY FOR THE TREATMENT OF HERNIAS
Minimally invasive surgery has revolutionized the treatment of various medical conditions, offering significant benefits in terms of recovery and fewer complications. In the field ...
Minimally Invasive Versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy (LEOPARD)
Minimally Invasive Versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy (LEOPARD)
Objective:
This trial followed a structured nationwide training program in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP), according to the IDEAL framework for...

