[Fluoroscopic-guided primary single-step percutaneous gastrostomy: initial results using the Freka® GastroTube]. / Primäre einzeitige durchleuchtungsgesteuerte perkutane Gastrostomie (PG): Erste Ergebnisse mit dem Freka® GastroTube.

PURPOSE: To determine the practicability and outcome of fluoroscopic-guided primary one-step treatment of percutaneous gastrostomy (PG) with the system Freka® Gastro Tube (Fresenius Kabi, Germany). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 39 patients (mean age 62.7 ± 12.0 years), primary PG was performed based on clinical indication from August 2009 to April 2010. The intervention was performed by an experienced radiologist under aseptic conditions by direct puncture with Freka® Gastro Tube under fluoroscopic guidance. The clinical data and outcome as well as any complications originated from the electronic archive of the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf. RESULTS: The intervention was technically successful in all 39 patients. Within the mean follow-up time of 155.3 ± 73.6 days, 29 patients (74.4 %) did not experience complications. 10 patients (25.6 %) had to be revised. Complications manifested after a mean of 135.6 ± 61.2 days and mainly corresponded to accidental dislocation (50 %). One patient had to be surgically revised under suspicion of a malpositioned tube and suspected intestinal perforation. Clinically relevant wound infections were not detected. The total costs per patient were 553.17 € for our single-step treatment (OPS 5 - 431.x) vs. 963.69 € (OPS 5 - 431.x and OPS 8 - 123.0) for the recommended two-step treatment. CONCLUSION: Fluoroscopic-guided primary single-step treatment with Freka® Gastro Tube system is feasible and not associated with an increased complication rate when compared to published literature applying a two-step treatment approach. Material costs as well as human and time resources could be significantly reduced using the single-step treatment.

Pharmacoeconomic analysis of liposomal amphotericin B versus conventional amphotericin B in the empirical treatment of persistently febrile neutropenic patients.

PURPOSE: In a randomized, double-blind, comparative, multicenter trial, liposomal amphotericin B was equivalent to conventional amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy in febrile neutropenic patients, using a composite end point, but was more effective in reducing proven emergent fungal infections, infusion-related toxicities, and nephrotoxicity. The purpose of this study was to compare the pharmacoeconomics of liposomal versus conventional therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Itemized hospital billing data were collected on 414 patients from 19 of the 32 centers that participated in the trial. Hospital length of stay and costs from the first dose of study medication to the time of hospital discharge were assessed. RESULTS: Hospital costs from the time of first dose to discharge were significantly higher for all patients who received liposomal amphotericin B ($48,962 v $43,183; P =.022). However, hospital costs were highly sensitive to the cost of study medication ($39,648 v $43,048 when drug costs were not included; P =.416). Using decision analysis models and sensitivity analyses to vary the cost of study medications and the risk of nephrotoxicity, the break-even points for the cost of liposomal therapy were calculated to range from $72 to $87 per 50 mg for all patients and $83 to $112 per 50 mg in allogeneic bone marrow transplant patients. CONCLUSION: The cost of liposomal amphotericin B and patient risk for developing nephrotoxicity play large roles in determining whether liposomal amphotericin B is cost-effective as first-line empirical therapy in persistently febrile neutropenic patients.