ArticleHealth economics review2022
Economic impact of powered stapler in video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy for lung Cancer in a Chinese tertiary hospital: a cost-minimization analysis.
Article in Health economics review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-World Clinical Outcomes of Manual Versus Powered Endoscopic Staplers in Minimally Invasive Lung Cancer Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Comparison of clinical and economic outcomes among patients undergoing lung resection using ECHELONJournal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Ex-PALM: a negative pressure ventilation system for air leak evaluation inFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Trends and Hotspots in the Health Economics Evaluation of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo assess the economic impact of powered stapler use in video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) lobectomy for lung cancer in a Chinese tertiary care hospital.
methodsThis study identified 388 patients who received VATS lobectomy using the ECHELON powered stapler (n = 296) or the ECHELON manual stapler (n = 92) for lung cancer in a Chinese tertiary hospital. Multiple generalized linear regression analyses were conducted using data on hospital costs and patient characteristics to develop predictive equations for hospital costs in a cost-minimization analysis (CMA) model comparing hospital costs associated with the ECHELON powered stapler and the ECHELON manual stapler. CMA model was used to conduct scenario analysis to compare the ECHELON powered stapler with another manual stapler (Victor Medical).
resultsThe multiple generalized linear regression analyses identified that using the ECHELON powered stapler in VATS lobectomy for lung cancer was associated with significantly lower drug costs than using the ECHELON manual stapler (coefficient - 0.256, 95% confidence interval: - 0.375 to - 0.139). The CMA model estimated that the ECHELON powered stapler could save hospital costs by ¥1653 when compared with the ECHELON manual stapler (¥65,531 vs. ¥67,184). The use of the ECHELON powered stapler also saved hospital costs by ¥4411 when compared with the Victor Medical manual stapler (¥65,531 vs. ¥69,942) in the scenario analysis.
conclusionsCompared to the two manual staplers used for VATS lobectomy for lung cancer in a Chinese tertiary hospital, the ECHELON powered stapler had 100% probability to save total hospital costs under present prices of the three staplers according to the CMA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.