Cost-Effectiveness of Bone SPECT/CT in Painful Total Knee Arthroplasty.

The purpose of this study was to quantify the economic value of bone SPECT/CT versus CT or metal artifact reduction sequence (MARS)-MRI for the diagnostic assessment of recurrent moderate-to-severe pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods: An Excel-based simulation model was developed to compare bone SPECT/CT versus CT or MARS-MRI from a payer perspective. Clinical endpoints (diagnosis-delayed or otherwise, and the subsequent treatment and complications) and their corresponding cost data (2017 U.S. dollars) were obtained by performing a best evidence review of the published literature. Studies were pooled and parameters weighted by sample size. A cost-utility analysis was performed estimating the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life years gained between bone SPECT/CT and the comparative scans. One-way (±25%) sensitivity analysis was performed to gauge the model robustness. Results: For every 1,000 TKA patients, diagnostic bone SPECT/CT was expected to lead to 3-y cost savings up to $1,867,695 versus CT (or $622.6 per patient per year) and $1,723,435 versus MARS-MRI (or $574.5 per patient per year) for a payer. With corresponding incremental quality-adjusted life years gains of 39.7 and 41.0 against CT and MARS-MRI, SPECT/CT can be considered as a cost-saving and dominant strategy in the workup of persistent/recurrent pain in TKA patients. The model was limited by the still sparse literature data, was most sensitive to imaging-related sensitivity/specificity, but proved robust for varying prevalence of surgical/nonsurgical causes of pain. Conclusion: Bone SPECT/CT is a potentially highly cost-saving and dominant imaging intervention versus CT or MARS-MR scanning in patients with recurrent and persistent knee pain after TKA.

Comparison of single photon emission CT (SPECT) with SPECT/CT imaging in preoperative localization of parathyroid adenomas: A cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists regarding the superiority of single photon emission CT (SPECT)/CT over SPECT for preoperative localization of parathyroid adenomas in primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT), as well as the cost-effectiveness. METHODS: A retrospective review was undertaken of patients undergoing surgery for PHPT from January 2009 to August 2014. Ultrasound and SPECT (ultrasound-SPECT) or SPECT/CT (ultrasound-SPECT/CT) were performed for each patient. Sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) of each modality were calculated. Cost-effectiveness was determined by an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) analysis. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-nine patients with 266 parathyroid adenomas were included in the study. Lateralization sensitivity and PPV of ultrasound-SPECT were 85.1% and 98.2%, respectively. The lateralization sensitivity and PPV of ultrasound-SPECT/CT were 86.9% and 99.4%, respectively. A cost of $2499.22 (CAD) per additional parathyroid adenoma detection by ultrasound-SPECT/CT was determined from the ICER analysis. CONCLUSION: Similar sensitivities and PPVs were observed between ultrasound-SPECT and ultrasound-SPECT/CT in preoperatively lateralizing parathyroid adenomas, with relatively equivalent cost-effectiveness. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 38: E2062-E2065, 2016.

Comparison of SPECT/CT and planar MIBI in terms of operating time and cost in the surgical management of primary hyperparathyroidism.

We conducted a retrospective study to compare operating times and costs in patients who underwent guided parathyroidectomies with either (1) technetium-99m ((99m)Tc) multiplex ion-beam imaging (MIBI) parathyroid scintigraphy with single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography (SPECT/CT) fusion images or (2) sestamibi dual-phase (99m)Tc MIBI planar parathyroid scintigraphy alone preoperatively. Our study population was made up of the first 24 patients at our facility who had undergone SPECT/CT parathyroid imaging with technetium-99m ((99m)Tc) MIBI and a group of 24 patients who had undergone MIBI planar imaging alone. Patient demographics, preoperative laboratory test results, operating times, and hospital charges were analyzed. We found that less operating time was required for the planar MIBI group than in the SPECT/CT group (mean: 135 vs. 158 min), although the difference was not statistically significant. Likewise, the total cost of treatment was lower in the planar MIBI group (mean: $10,035 vs. $11,592); the difference was statistically significant by one measure (p × 0.02, Wilcoxon rank sum test) but not by another (p × 0.06, Student t test). Although SPECT/CT is efficient for patients with small and difficult-to-localize adenomas, it has yet to demonstrate greater efficacy or cost-effectiveness than planar MIBI for routine parathyroidectomy in patients with primary hyperparathyroidism when an easily identifiable parathyroid adenoma is localized.