RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To analyze the cost effectiveness of performing a renal mass biopsy in advance of ablation or concurrently with a percutaneous ablation procedure for the management of small renal masses (SRMs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A decision-analytic model was developed with a cohort of 65-year-old male patients with an incidental, unilateral 1-3 cm SRM. A decision tree modeled the first year of clinical intervention, after which patients entered a Markov model with a lifetime horizon. Patients were assumed to be treated in accordance with established clinical practice guidelines, including surveillance, repeat ablation for recurrence, and systemic therapy for metastasis. Healthcare cost and utility values were determined from published literature or local hospital estimates, discounted at 1.5%. Total lifetime costs were calculated from the perspective of a Canadian healthcare payer and converted to 2022 Canadian dollars (C$). The primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) at a willingness-to-pay threshold of C$50,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. The secondary outcome was ICER at a willingness-to-pay threshold of C$50,000 per life year (LY) gained. RESULTS: Concurrent biopsy and ablation resulted in a gain of 16.4 quality-adjusted days, at an incremental cost of $386, with an ICER of C$8,494/QALY. The concurrent strategy was the dominant strategy for a prevalence of benign mass of <5%. Sequential biopsy and ablation was only cost-effective when LYs were not quality-adjusted and ablation cost was >C$4,300 or benign mass prevalence was >28%. CONCLUSIONS: Concurrent biopsy and ablation is cost-effective relative to pretreatment diagnostic biopsy for management of incidental SRMs.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In April 2021, the province of Ontario, Canada, was at the peak of its third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Intensive Care Unit (ICU) capacity in the Toronto metropolitan area was insufficient to handle local COVID patients. As a result, some patients from the Toronto metropolitan area were transferred to other regions. METHODS: A spreadsheet-based Monte Carlo simulation tool was built to help a large tertiary hospital plan and make informed decisions about the number of transfer patients it could accept from other hospitals. The model was implemented in Microsoft Excel to enable it to be widely distributed and easily used. The model estimates the probability that each ward will be overcapacity and percentiles of utilization daily for a one-week planning horizon. RESULTS: The model was used from May 2021 to February 2022 to support decisions about the ability to accept transfers from other hospitals. The model was also used to ensure adequate inpatient bed capacity and human resources in response to various COVID-related scenarios, such as changes in hospital admission rates, managing the impact of intra-hospital outbreaks and balancing the COVID response with planned hospital activity. CONCLUSIONS: Coordination between hospitals was necessary due to the high stress on the health care system. A simple planning tool can help to understand the impact of patient transfers on capacity utilization and improve the confidence of hospital leaders when making transfer decisions. The model was also helpful in investigating other operational scenarios and may be helpful when preparing for future outbreaks or public health emergencies.
