Multidimensional Impact of Dupilumab on Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps: A Complete Health Technology Assessment of Clinical, Economic, and Non-Clinical Domains.

Chronic RhinoSinusitis with Nasal Polyps (CRSwNP) represents a condition mainly caused by the type 2 inflammation presence and marked by the existence of polyps within the nasal and paranasal sinuses. The standard of care includes intranasal steroids, additional burst of systemic steroids, if needed, and surgery. However, recurrence is common, especially among patients with comorbid type 2 inflammatory diseases. Recently, biological drugs, addressing the underlying cause of the disease, have been approved in Italy (dupilumab, omalizumab, and mepolizumab). A Health Technology Assessment was conducted to define multidimensional impact, assuming Italian NHS perspective and a 12-month time horizon. The EUnetHTA Core Model was deployed, using the following methods to analyze the domains: (i) literature evidence; (ii) administration of semi-structured questionnaires to 17 healthcare professionals; (iii) health economics tools to define the economic sustainability for the system. Evidence from NMA and ITC showed a more favorable safety profile and better efficacy for dupilumab compared with alternative biologics. All the analyses, synthesizing cost and efficacy measures, showed that dupilumab is the preferable alternative. Specifically, the cost per responder analysis for dupilumab, exhibiting a 67.0% response rate at Week 52, is notably economical at 14,209EUR per responder. This presents a more economical profile compared with the cost per responder for omalizumab (36.2% response rate) at 24,999EUR and mepolizumab (28.5% response rate) at 31,863EUR. These results underscore dupilumab's potential, not merely in terms of clinical outcomes, but also in terms of economic rationality, thereby solidifying its status as a valid and preferrable alternative in the management of CRSwNP, in the context of the Italian NHS.

Barbed sutures and skin adhesives improve wound closure in hip and knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to formulate evidence-based recommendations for optimising wound management in hip and knee arthroplasty by exploring alternative methods such as barbed sutures and skin adhesives. METHODS: A Delphi panel, comprising seven orthopaedic surgeons, one musculoskeletal infectious disease specialist, and one health economics expert, was convened to evaluate the use of barbed sutures and skin adhesives for wound closure in hip and knee arthroplasty. Two systematic reviews informed the development of questionnaires, with panelists ranking their agreement on statements using a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was achieved if ≥75% agreement. Unresolved statements were revisited in a second round. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 11 statements, providing evidence-based recommendations. The expert panel advocates for a multilayer watertight technique using barbed sutures to prevent surgical site infections (SSI), reduce complications, shorten surgical times, optimise resources and improve cosmetic appearance. For skin closure, the panel recommends topical adhesives to decrease wound dehiscence, enhance cosmetic appearance, promote patient compliance, prevent SSIs, and optimise resources. CONCLUSION: The Delphi consensus by Italian total joint arthroplasty experts underscores the pivotal role of barbed sutures and skin adhesives in optimising outcomes. While guiding clinical decision-making, these recommendations are not prescriptive and should be adapted to local practices. The study encourages further research to enhance current evidence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

[Cystic fibrosis carrier screening: a Health technology assessment.] / Lo screening del portatore di fibrosi cistica: una valutazione di Health technology assessment.

This project of Health technology assessment was aimed at defining the impacts of offering a cystic fibrosis (CF) carrier screening to the general population, compared to the current situation, where the test is offered to individuals at high-risk to give birth to a child with CF. Results revealed: i) a lack of robust and updated data; ii) a return on investment up to six years from the screening's introduction, despite important economic and organizational efforts; iii) a general positive attitude of healthcare professionals, people with CF, families and general population; iv) possible issues related to the social impact.