Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Clinical Research
  • Published:

Utility after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared to conventional approaches for localized prostate cancer [socioeconomic perspective study]

Abstract

Background

This study presented the utility across approaches (robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) or open radical prostatectomy (ORP)), across disease states after surgery, and also across functional outcomes for localized prostate cancers. The utility was measured using the time trade-off method.

Methods

This survey was based on a scenario that describes the state of health in detail and considers surgical methods, short-term adverse effects following RP, disease-specific conditions, and additional treatments 1 year following RP.

Results

This study analyzed 393 men; the utility values are as follows: first, health status postoperatively showed that the utility value decreased in patients who underwent ORP versus those who underwent LRP. The utility value for ORP and LRP versus RARP was reduced by ~0.028 (10 days per year) and 0.008 (3 days per year), respectively. Second, the utility value based on adverse effects after RP indicated that erectile dysfunction caused a greater reduction in efficacy than urinary incontinence. Regarding erectile dysfunction and urinary incontinence, the efficacy was reduced to ~0.137 (50 days per year) and 0.111 (41 days per year), respectively, as compared to a health state without adverse effects based on no evidence of disease status.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the disutility was much greater due to the side effects than the disutility due to the difference in the surgical method. In particular, the disutility of erectile dysfunction was bigger than that of the urinary incontinence.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. 2013 National Health Insurance Service and Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service. http://www.nhis.or.kr/bbs7/boards/B0075/12434. Accessed 29 Aug 2017.

  2. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer. 2015;136:E359–E386.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Han HH, Park JW, Na JC, Chung BH, Kim CS, Ko WJ. Epidemiology of prostate cancer in South Korea. Prostate Int. 2015;3:99–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brazier J, Ratcliffe J, Saloman J, Tsuchiya A. Measuring and valuing health benefits for economic evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Kim YH, Hwang JS, Ahn JH, Lee SM, Lee YJ, Shin SJ. Utilities for prostate cancer by cancer stage and treatment period step in Korea. Korean J Health Econ Policy. 2013;19:1–20.

  6. Lee SH, Kim JH, Hwang JS, Choi JE, Shine EH, Lee NR et al. Clinical effectiveness and safety of robotic surgery. Seoul: National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency (NECA)2013; NECA-3-13-007.

  7. Korfage IJ, de Koning HJ, Habbema JD, Schroder FH, Essink-Bot ML. Side-effects of treatment for localized prostate cancer: are they valued differently by patients and healthy controls? BJU Int. 2007;99:801–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Nelson CP, Routh JC, Logvinenko T, Rosoklija I, Kokorowski PJ, Prosser LA, et al. Utility scores for vesicoureteral reflux and anti-reflux surgery. J Pediatr Urol. 2015;11:177–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by the National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency in Korea (NA14-002).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seon Heui Lee.

Ethics declarations

Compliance with ethical standards

The present study protocol was reviewed and approved by the institutional review board of National Evidence-based Collaborating Agency (Reg. No. NECAIRB14-002).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interest.

Informed consent

Informed consent was submitted by all subjects when they were enrolled.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lee, MJ., Park, DA. & Lee, S. Utility after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared to conventional approaches for localized prostate cancer [socioeconomic perspective study]. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 22, 461–466 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-018-0119-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-018-0119-9

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links