The usefulness of routine histopathology of bilateral nasal polyps - a systematic review, meta-analysis, and cost evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Controversy regarding the usefulness of routine histopathological examination of bilateral nasal polyps removed during endoscopic sinus surgery to identify occult diagnoses still exists. There is a paucity of high-level evidence in the literature. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. Two independent reviewers were used. Pooled proportions and numbers needed to screen were calculated. A cost per life year model was generated based on varying survival benefits and compared to other Canadian screening programs to provide financial context. RESULTS: Six studies (n = 3772 patients) were included. Of the 3772 patients, 3751 had a pre-operative clinical and post-operative pathological diagnosis of inflammatory nasal polyps. Agreement proportion was 99.44 %. There were 18 unexpected benign and three unexpected malignant diagnoses identified. This translated to a proportion of 0.48 and 0.08 % respectively. Number needed to screen was 210 and 1258 respectively. Pooled proportion for expected findings using a random effect model was 0.99 (95 % CI = 0.99-1). Pooled proportion for unexpected benign findings using a random effect model was 0.00522 (95 % CI = 0.00133-0.01). Pooled proportion for unexpected malignant findings using a random effect model was 0.00107 (95 % CI = 0.000147-0.00283). The cost to pick up one unexpected benign diagnosis was $14557.2. The cost to pick up 1 unexpected malignant diagnosis was $87204.56. Cost per quality life year calculated ranged from 3211.83 to $64677.58 based on varying assumptions on the survival benefits of identifying an unexpected malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: Routine pathological examination in screening for neoplasia may be low yield, however, no compelling evidence was found to cease such practice. Surgeons should exercise individual judgment in requesting routine examination.

Surgeon-estimated costs of common consumables in otolaryngology.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The current fiscal climate demands increasing emphasis on curbing hospital expenses incurred from surgical procedures. Disposable instruments and consumables play a major role, but the end user (the surgeon) is often unaware of the cost of these materials. The objectives of our study were: 1) to assess knowledge of costs of disposable instruments and consumable products, and 2) to gauge interest in greater access to cost information and its potential to change practice. STUDY DESIGN: We used a cross-sectional survey study to meet our study's objectives. METHODS: A paper-based anonymous questionnaire was administered in the Department of Otolaryngology at McGill University and at Western University asking for estimations of costs of 23 commonly used products in the operating room. Our primary outcome measure was accuracy of cost estimations, which were considered accurate if within ± 50% of the true cost at the respective institution. RESULTS: The average accuracy was 29.9% (standard deviation = 16.7%). There was no significant difference between residents (32.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.2%-54.7%) and staff (28.3%, 95% CI: 11.0%-45.6%). Less than 10% of participants were able to accurately estimate the costs of at least half of the disposable products. The majority of participants (82%) felt that greater information would change their use of consumables. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical residents and staff have a generally poor knowledge of the cost of common consumable products used in the operating room. There is potential for increased awareness of costs to change behavior. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA.

The utility of routine polyp histopathology after endoscopic sinus surgery.

BACKGROUND: Routine histopathological assessment is standard practice for nasal polyp specimens obtained during endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Retrospective studies suggest that routine histopathology of nasal polyps shows few unexpected diagnoses that alter patient management. Our objective was to study the use of routine pathological analysis, and its cost to the healthcare system, in a prospective manner. METHODS: A multicenter prospective assessment was performed from data collected between 2007 and 2013. Only cases of patients undergoing ESS for bilateral CRS were included. We excluded unilateral disease cases, and cases in which diagnoses other than polyps were suspected either preoperatively or intraoperatively. We then compared the preoperative diagnosis with the final histopathology and identified the rate of unexpected pathologies. A cost analysis was performed. RESULTS: Only 4 of 866 pathological specimens were identified as having a clinically significant unexpected diagnosis. All unexpected pathologies in this series were benign. These 4 cases account for 0.46% of all specimens reviewed. This translates to a number needed to screen of 217 cases of bilateral CRS to discover 1 unexpected pathology. The associated cost for making an unexpected diagnosis was $19,192.73. CONCLUSION: Routine histopathology of nasal polyps in ESS for bilateral CRS with polyps yields few unexpected and management-altering diagnoses. It carries a significant cost to the healthcare system. In cases of bilateral CRS with no other concerning clinical features, clinicians should exercise judgment in submitting polyp specimens for pathology rather than routinely sending polyps for histopathologic analysis.