Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40616606›Full record

ArticleHealth economics review2025

Robot-assisted approach versus open surgery and conventional laparoscopy for radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: a micro-costing study.

Sophie Bouvet, Sihame Chkair, Jean Pierre Daurès, Sarah Kabani, OptiPRobot Study Group, Thierry Chevallier, Eric Lechevallier, Stéphane Droupy

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health economics review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01577836 (Medico-economic Comparison of Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Using the da Vinci System Versus Radical Prostatectomy Via Laparotomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT01577836 nacompletednot on this map

Medico-economic Comparison of Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Using the da Vinci System Versus Radical Prostatectomy Via Laparotomy

TypeinterventionalSponsorCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de NīmesRan2012 to 2021Enrolled90ConditionsProstatic NeoplasmsArmsRobot-assisted radical prostatectomy, Radical prostatectomy via laparotomy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Sophie Bouvet *Department of Biostatistics, Clinical Epidemiology, Public Health and Innovation in Methodology (BESPIM), CHU Nîmes, Univ Montpellier, 30029, Nîmes, France. sophie.bouvet@chu-nimes.fr.
Sihame Chkair *Department of Biostatistics, Clinical Epidemiology, Public Health and Innovation in Methodology (BESPIM), CHU Nîmes, Univ Montpellier, 30029, Nîmes, France.
Jean Pierre DaurèsLanguedoc Mutual Group - Hospital and Care Division, Montpellier, France.
Sarah KabaniDepartment of Biostatistics, Clinical Epidemiology, Public Health and Innovation in Methodology (BESPIM), CHU Nîmes, Univ Montpellier, 30029, Nîmes, France.
OptiPRobot Study Group
Thierry ChevallierDepartment of Biostatistics, Clinical Epidemiology, Public Health and Innovation in Methodology (BESPIM), CHU Nîmes, Univ Montpellier, 30029, Nîmes, France.
Eric LechevallierDepartment of Urology and Renal Transplantation, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, Aix-Marseille Université, Marseille, France.
Stéphane DroupyDepartment of Urology, Andrology and Sexology, CHU Nîmes, Univ Montpellier, Nîmes, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe economic impact of RARP versus laparoscopic (LRP) or open surgical radical prostatectomy (OSRP) is unclear. The objective is to estimate and compare the total cost of radical prostatectomy with and without robot assistance from the French establishment perspective. This estimate can assess the cost benefit of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and determine who should pay.

methodsA micro-costing bottom-up time-and-motion approach was used based on 2018 prices (€). In public hospitals, observed data for OSRP and RARP was used; in private hospitals, expert opinions were sought from clinicians for RARP and LRP. Average costs, costs per minute of surgery and costs per expenditure were compared between techniques. A sensitivity analysis accounted for variability in cost of personnel and amortized cost of Da Vinci robot.

resultsThe average estimated cost of surgery was 4683.35€ [95% CI=2900; 6467.2] more for RARP versus LRP in private clinics, and 3744€ [95% CI=3525; 3963] for RARP versus OSRP in public hospital. Recovery costs were equivalent between techniques (112.9€ for RARP and LRP in private and 46.1€ [95% CI=31.8; 60.4] for OSRP and 47.8€ [95% CI=39.1; 56.5] for RARP in public hospital). The sensitivity analysis confirmed the extra cost for RARP versus LRP or OSRP.

conclusionsDepending on the surgery compared (OSRP or LRP), institute type (public or private) and data source (observed or expert opinion), the extra cost of the robot varied from 3744€ to 4683.35€. The amortized cost of the robot and its specific materials were the main elements of the difference.

trial registrationThis comparative, multi-centre economic study combines one secondary objective from the RoboProstate study (NCT01577836) and part 1 of the OptiPRobot study (IRB #19.07.03).

Indexed as

Cost analysisMicro-costing studyOpen surgeryPrivate hospitalPublic hospitalRadical prostatectomyRobot assisted surgery

Identifiers

PMID40616606
PMCPMC12228392

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.