The costs involved in performing robotic surgery present a critical issue which has not been well addressed yet. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes and cost-effective outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for right-sided colon cancer. This is an observational, comparative study whereby data were abstracted from a database of patients who underwent laparoscopic (LAP) and robotic (ROB) right hemicolectomy from October 2010 to March 2017, at Sanchinarro University Hospital. Outcome parameters included surgical and post-operative costs, quality adjusted life years (QALY), and incremental cost per QALY gained or the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER). A sensitivity analysis was carried out in order to propagate the uncertainty of the estimations to the results of the model. We use a multivariate and stochastic sensitivity analysis performed by 5000 Monte Carlo simulations. The cost-effectiveness plane was used to represent all pairs of solutions of the model. A total of 20 robotic and 200 laparoscopic hemicolectomies were included. The mean operative time was significantly lower in the laparoscopic approach (336 versus 283 min;p= 0.001). The main pre-operative data, overall morbidity, hospital stay and oncological outcomes were similar in both groups. The mean operative costs were higher for robotic surgery (€6423.77 vs €4415.20; p= 0.006) and the mean overall costs were higher too (€ 9455.1 for for robotic and € 8227.5 for the laparoscopic approach; p= 0.835). Mean QALYs at 1 year for robotic group (0.5624) was higher than that associated with OL (0.5066) (p=0.018). At a willingness-to-pay threshold of 20000 € and 30000 €, there was a 64.68% and 71.09% probability that robotic group was cost-effective relative to LAP approach. Robotic right hemicolectomy approach appears to be cost-effective compared with laparoscopic approach.