Cost-effectiveness of hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic versus standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: A randomized study.
Klop K W, Kok NF, et al.Transplantation 2013; 96(2):170-5.
Aims
To investigate the cost- effectiveness of hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy (HARP) versus standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN).
Interventions
HARP versus LDN.
Participants
190 live kidney donors.
Outcomes
The outcomes of this study include direct treatment costs, societal costs and effectiveness measured in terms of health –related quality of life.
Follow-up
12 weeks.
CET Conclusions
This is a very careful analysis of the cost effectiveness of hand assisted retroperitoneoscopic versus standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, these patients had all been involved in the HARP study and both total in hospital costs were assessed for both procedures as well as societal costs arising from time lost from work. The absolute costs of both procedures were low and no different and the societal costs again were the same in both groups. However they also assessed quality adjusted life years (QALYS) and laparoscopic donor nephrectomy did improve quality of life compared to the hand assisted nephrectomy.
Data analysis
Strict intention-to-treat analysis
Quality notes
Jadad score taken from Dols et al. Hand assisted retroperitoneoscopic versus standard laproscopic donor nephrectomy: HARP trial. BMC surgery 2010; 10: 11.
Trial registration
Not reported.