Health Technology Assessment in Abdominal Wall Surgery

  • Valentina BerettaEmail author
  • Michele Tringali
  • Antonio Marioni


Health Technology Assessment (HTA) would provide a useful tool for the assessment of different technologies. HTA aims at systematically evaluating the properties, effects, and impacts of health technologies, in order to support policy-makers in taking decisions. This chapter presents how HTA is conducted in abdominal wall surgery, by analyzing the main differences across many techniques that can be adopted. Open surgery, videolaparoscopic surgery, and robotic surgery are compared. Additionally, the case study of Tuscany is presented, where thanks to the collaboration of the University Hospital of Pisa and the Grosseto Hospital, the robotic technique plays an important role in the treatment of the abdominal wall hernia. The Tuscany case shows that an important change is ongoing, by presenting how surgeons and institutions may collaborate in order to find the best solution both from the side of science and of economy.


Abdominal wall surgery HTA Robotic surgery Videolaparoscopic surgery Health economics Health system sustainability 


  1. 1.
    Gutt CN, Oniu T, Mehrabi A, Kashfi A, Schemmer P, Büchler MW. Robot-assisted abdominal surgery. Br J Surg. 2004;91(11):1390–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Monson JR. Advanced techniques in abdominal surgery. BMJ. 1993;307(November):1346–50.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hanly EJ, Talamini MA. Robotic abdominal surgery. Am J Surg. 2004;188(4 Suppl. 1):19–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Armijo PR, Pagkratis S, Boilesen E, Tanner T, Oleynikov D. Growth in robotic-assisted procedures is from conversion of laparoscopic procedures and not from open surgeons’ conversion: a study of trends and costs. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(4):2106–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jefferson T, Abraha I, Chiarolla E, Corio M, Paone S, Piccoli M, et al. HTA report robotic surgery. Vol. Agenas, Ro. 2017.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hanly EJ, Zand J, Bachman SL, Marohn MR, Talamini MA. Value of the SAGES Learning Center in introducing new technology. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech. 2005;19(4):477–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    D’Annibale A, Morpurgo E, Fiscon V, Trevisan P, Sovernigo G, Orsini C, et al. Robotic and laparoscopic surgery for treatment of colorectal diseases. Dis Colon Rectum. 2004;47(12):2162–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jain S, Jain M. Comparison between laparoscopic and open hernia repair: a clinical trial. Int J Adv Multidiscip Res. 2018;5(4):1–5.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kuhry E, Van Veen RN, Langeveld HR, Steyerberg EW, Jeekel J, Bonjer HJ. Open or endoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair? A systematic review. Surg Endosc. 2007;21(2):161–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Smink DS, Paquette IM, Finlayson SRG. Utilization of laparoscopic and open inguinal hernia repair: a population-based analysis. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech. 2009;19(6):745–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    McCormack K, Scott N, Go PM, Ross SJ, Grant A. Laparoscopic techniques versus open techniques for inguinal hernia repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;1:CD001785.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Khajanchee YS, Kenyon TAG, Hansen PD, Swanström LL. Economic evaluation of laparoscopic and open inguinal herniorrhaphies: the effect of cost-containment measures and internal hospital policy decisions on costs and charges. Hernia. 2004;8(3):196–202.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jacobs VR, Morrison JE Jr. Comparison of institutional costs for laparoscopic preperitoneal inguinal hernia versus open repair and its reimbursement in an ambulatory surgery center. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutaneous Tech. 2008;18(1):70–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Payne JH, Grininger LM, Izawa MT, Podoll EF, Lindahl PJ, Balfour J. Laparoscopic or open inguinal herniorrhaphy?: a randomized prospective trial. Arch Surg. 1994;129(9):973–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Menon M, Tewari A, Baize B, Guillonneau B, Vallancien G. Prospective comparison of radical retropubic prostatectomy and robot-assisted anatomic prostatectomy: the Vattikuti Urology Institute experience. Urology. 2002;60(5):864–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tan A, Ashrafian H, Scott AJ, Mason SE, Harling L, Athanasiou T, et al. Robotic surgery: disruptive innovation or unfulfilled promise? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the first 30 years. Surg Endosc. 2016;30(10):4330–52. Scholar
  17. 17.
    Roh HF, Nam SH, Kim JM. Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in randomized controlled trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2018;13:1–12.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Goodman CS. Introduction to health technology assessment. 2014.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    National Academy of Engineering C on PEP. A Study of Technology Assessment. 1969.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Galbraith JK. The New Industrial State. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1977. 577pGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Brooks H, Bowers R. The assessment of technology. Sci Am. 1970;222:13–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Banta D, Jonsson E. History of HTA: introduction. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25(Suppl.S1):1–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sorenson C, Chalkidou K. Reflections on the evolution of health technology assessment in Europe. Heal Econ Policy Law. 2012;7(1):25–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Oliver A, Mossialos E, Robinson R. Health technology assessment and its influence on health-care priority setting. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20(1):1–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Banta D, Jonsson E. History of HTA: introduction. Int J Technol Assess Health Care [Internet]. 2009;25(S1):1–6. Available from: Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bero L, Rennie D. The cochrane collaboration: preparing, maintaining, and disseminating systematic reviews of the effects of health care. JAMA. 1995;274(24):1935–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stevens A, Milne R, Burls A. Health technology assessment: history and demand. J Public Health. 2003;25(2):98–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Department of Health L. Assessing the effects of health technologies. London: Department of Health; 1991.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ballantyne GH. Telerobotic gastrointestinal surgery: phase 2—safety and efficacy. Surg Endosc. 2007;21(7):1054–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Taylor GW, Jayne DG. Robotic applications in abdominal surgery: their limitations and future developments. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg. 2007;3(1):3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Schumpelick V. In: Schumpelick V, editor. Narbenhernie. Stuttgart: Hernien Thieme; 2000. p. 266–9.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Chevrel JP, Rath AM. Classification of incisional hernias of the abdominal wall. Hernia. 2000;4(1):7–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Korenkov M, Paul A, Sauerland S, Neugebauer E, Arndt M, Chevrel JP, et al. Classification and surgical treatment of incisional hernia. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg. 2001;386(1):65–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Dietz UA, Hamelmann W, Winkler MS, Debus ES, Malafaia O, Czeczko NG, et al. An alternative classification of incisional hernias enlisting morphology, body type and risk factors in the assessment of prognosis and tailoring of surgical technique. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2007;60(4):383–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ammaturo C, Bassi G. The ratio between anterior abdominal wall surface/wall defect surface: a new parameter to classify abdominal incisional hernias. Hernia. 2005;9(4):316–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Miserez M, Alexandre JH, Campanelli G, Corcione F, Cuccurullo D, Pascual MH, et al. The European hernia society groin hernia classication: simple and easy to remember. Hernia. 2007;11(2):113–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Muysoms F, Miserez M, Berrevoet F, Campanelli G, Champault GG, Chelala E, et al. Classification of primary and incisional abdominal wall hernias. Hernia. 2009;13(4):407–14.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Valentina Beretta
    • 1
    Email author
  • Michele Tringali
    • 2
  • Antonio Marioni
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Economics and ManagementUniversity of PaviaPaviaItaly
  2. 2.Hospital Programming Unit, HTA Office, Regional Government Health Care DirectorateLombardy RegionItaly
  3. 3.Surgery DepartmentUniversity Hospital of PisaPisaItaly

Personalised recommendations