Adjunct diagnostic strategies in improving diagnostic yields in image-guided biopsies of musculoskeletal neoplasms-A cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Routine use of adjunct intraprocedural fresh frozen biopsy (FFP) or point-of-care (POC) cytology at the time of image-guided biopsy can improve diagnostic tissue yields for musculoskeletal neoplasms, but these are associated with increased costs. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to ascertain the most cost-effective adjunctive test for image-guided biopsies of musculoskeletal neoplasms. METHODS: This expected value cost-effectiveness microsimulation compared the payoffs of cost (2020 United States dollars) and effectiveness (quality-adjusted life, in days) on each of the competing strategies. A literature review and institutional data were used to ascertain probabilities, diagnostic yields, utility values, and direct medical costs associated with each strategy. Payer and societal perspectives are presented. One- and two-way sensitivity analyses evaluated model uncertainties. RESULTS: The total cost and effectiveness for each of the strategies were $1248.98, $1414.09, $1980.53, and 80.31, 79.74, 79.69 days for the use of FFP, permanent pathology only, and POC cytology, respectively. The use of FFP dominated the competing strategies. Sensitivity analyses revealed FFP as the most cost-effective across all clinically plausible values. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunct FFP is most cost-effective in improving the diagnostic yield of image-guided biopsies for musculoskeletal neoplasms. These findings are robust to sensitivity analyses using clinically plausible probabilities.

Financial implications of CT-guided lung biopsy in a tertiary centre: a radiologists' perspective.

AIM: To evaluate the financial costs of performing computed tomography (CT)-guided lung biopsies in a large tertiary centre to help guide service development. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Local financial data were collected to create a balance sheet, considering all expenses as well as revenue sources associated with the procedure. Data were based on accurate pricing and income data and evaluated on a per-procedure basis, with consideration of additional costs arising from post-procedural complications. Revenue data were estimated based on reimbursement information. A small coding quality audit was also performed to check if reimbursement claims were filed correctly. RESULTS: This study demonstrated a healthy income generated from CT-guided lung biopsy procedures with a profit margin of 50%. Notably different financial impact was observed when comparing the same procedure undertaken on an outpatient as opposed to inpatient basis with inpatient procedures generating a net loss of - £2,146.79 a year. Overall, the activity generated a profit of £157,015.25, after accounting for loss generated by inpatient activity. CONCLUSION: This analysis furthered understanding of the financial impact from performing CT-guided lung biopsy and will enable better planning and expansion of the service in the future, with emphasis around day-case and ambulatory service development, the positive intended consequence being an improved patient pathway.

Prostate Cancer Detection Rate of Freehand versus 3-Dimensional Template Mapping Biopsy Using a Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Device in Biopsy Naïve Men.

PURPOSE: Targeted prostate biopsy devices include a 3-dimensional digital template grid to guide systematic biopsy locations. Following a template could better ensure uniform and well distributed sampling of the prostate compared to the traditional freehand biopsy approach, possibly decreasing the chance of false-negative biopsy. Thus, we determined cancer detection rates obtained by conventional freehand systematic sampling vs template mapping sampling using a magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion device. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Men who underwent first line conventional or image guided prostate biopsy were identified retrospectively in an institutional review board approved protocol. Excluded from study were men with prior biopsy or treatment or fewer than 10 cores taken. Targeted cores obtained by image guided biopsy were censored from analysis to simulate systematic template biopsy. The resulting cancer detection rate was compared to that of conventional biopsy. RESULTS: We identified 1,582 patients between 2006 and 2014 who met the criteria for analysis, including 1,052 who underwent conventional biopsy and 530 who underwent template biopsy with a magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion device. Patient age, prostate specific antigen and the number of systematic cores were the same in the 2 groups. Template biopsy detected any prostate cancer in 257 of 530 men (48.5%) and clinically significant cancer in 196 (37.0%) while conventional biopsy detected any cancer in 432 of 1,052 (41.0%) (p=0.005) and clinically significant cancer in 308 (29.2%) (p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Template mapping systematic biopsy detected more prostate cancer than conventional sampling in biopsy naïve men. It is a promising cost-effective alternative to magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy as an upfront screening tool.

Periprostatic nerve block alone versus combined with perineal pudendal nerve block or intrarectal local anesthesia during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: A prospective randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy, safety and cost of combinations of perineal pudendal nerve block + periprostatic nerve block and intrarectal local anesthesia + periprostatic nerve block with the standard technique (periprostatic nerve block). METHODS: The study was designed as a randomized prospective controlled trial. Patients with elevated serum prostate-specific antigen values (prostate-specific antigen ≥4 ng/mL) and/or abnormal digital rectal examination findings were included in the study. Patients with anorectal diseases, chronic prostatitis, previous history of prostate biopsy and anorectal surgery were excluded from the study. A total of 148 patients (group 1 [periprostatic nerve block], n = 48; group 2 [intrarectal local anesthesia + periprostatic nerve block], n = 51; group 3 [perineal pudendal nerve block + periprostatic nerve block], n = 49) were included in the final analysis. Pain during insertion and manipulation of the transrectal ultrasound probe was recorded as visual analog scale 1, pain during penetration of the biopsy needle into the prostate and sampling was recorded as visual analog scale 2, and pain during the entire procedure recorded as visual analog scale 3. RESULTS: The mean visual analog scale 1 score was significantly lower in group 3, when compared with group 1 and group 2 (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the mean visual analog scale 2 score. The mean visual analog scale 3 score was significantly lower in group 3 when compared with other groups (P < 0.001). The total cost for transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy in the intrarectal local anesthesia + periprostatic nerve block group was significantly higher than the other two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of perineal pudendal nerve block and periprostatic nerve block provides more effective pain control than intrarectal local anesthesia plus periprostatic nerve block and periprostatic nerve block alone, with similar complication rates and without increasing cost.

Incorporating Biomarkers into the Primary Prostate Biopsy Setting: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

PURPOSE: We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis using the PHI (Prostate Health Index), 4Kscore®, SelectMDx™ and the EPI (ExoDx™ Prostate [IntelliScore]) in men with elevated prostate specific antigen to determine the need for biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed a decision analytical model in men with elevated prostate specific antigen (3 ng/ml or greater) in which 1 biomarker test was used to determine which hypothetical individuals required biopsy. In the current standard of care strategy all individuals underwent biopsy. Model parameters were derived from a comprehensive review of the literature. Costs were calculated from a health sector perspective and converted into 2017 United States dollars. RESULTS: The cost and QALYs (quality adjusted life-years) of the current standard of care, which was transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy, was $3,863 and 18.085, respectively. Applying any of the 3 biomarkers improved quality adjusted survival compared to the current standard of care. The cost of SelectMDx, the PHI and the EPI was lower than performing prostate biopsy in all patients. However, the PHI was more costly and less effective than the SelectMDx strategy. The EPI provided the highest QALY with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $58,404 per QALY. The use of biomarkers could reduce the number of unnecessary biopsies by 24% to 34% compared to the current standard of care. CONCLUSIONS: Applying biomarkers in men with elevated prostate specific antigen to determine the need for biopsy improved quality adjusted survival by decreasing the number of biopsies performed and the treatment of indolent disease. Using SelectMDx or the EPI following elevated prostate specific antigen but before proceeding to biopsy is a cost-effective strategy in this setting.

Cost-Effectiveness of Urinary Biomarker Panel in Prostate Cancer Risk Assessment.

PURPOSE: SelectMDx (MDxHealth®) is a panel of urinary biomarkers used in conjunction with traditional risk factors to individualize risk prediction for clinically significant prostate cancer. In this study we sought to characterize the effectiveness of SelectMDx in a population of American men with elevated prostate specific antigen. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed a Markov decision analytical model to simulate the chain of events and downstream outcomes associated with ultrasound guided prostate biopsy and a strategy in which the biomarker panel is implemented prior to biopsy. The primary outcome was health outcomes, measured in QALYs (quality-adjusted life years). The secondary outcome was health care costs from the Medicare payer perspective. Multiple 1-way sensitivity analyses were performed to characterize model robustness. RESULTS: The expected mean QALYs per patient under the current standard was 10.796 at a cost of $11,060 during an 18-year horizon. Incorporating the urinary biomarker panel resulted in an expected mean of 10.841 QALYs per patient and a mean cost of $9,366, representing an average of 0.045 QALYs gained at a cost savings of $1,694 per patient. When extrapolating these data to a conservative estimate of 311,879 men per year undergoing biopsy, one would expect that the biomarker panel would result in an incremental 14,035 QALYs gained at a cost savings of $528,323,026 in each yearly cohort. The biomarker panel strategy dominated the current standard across a wide range of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Routine use of the SelectMDx urinary biomarker panel to guide biopsy decision making improved health outcomes and lowered costs in American men at risk for prostate cancer. This strategy may optimize the value of prostate cancer risk assessment in an era of increasing financial accountability.

Cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging and targeted fusion biopsy for early detection of prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To determine how best to use magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and targeted MRI/ultrasonography fusion biopsy for early detection of prostate cancer (PCa) in men with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentrations and whether it can be cost-effective. METHODS: A Markov model of PCa onset and progression was developed to estimate the health and economic consequences of PCa screening with MRI. Patients underwent PSA screening from ages 55 to 69 years. Patients with elevated PSA concentrations (>4 ng/mL) underwent MRI, followed by targeted fusion or combined (standard + targeted fusion) biopsy on positive MRI, and standard or no biopsy on negative MRI. Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score on MRI was used to determine biopsy decisions. Deaths averted, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), cost and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were estimated for each strategy. RESULTS: With a negative MRI, standard biopsy was more expensive and had lower QALYs than performing no biopsy. The optimum screening strategy (ICER $23 483/QALY) recommended combined biopsy for patients with PI-RADS score ≥3 and no biopsy for patients with PI-RADS score <3, and reduced the number of screening biopsies by 15%. Threshold analysis suggests MRI continues to be cost-effective when the sensitivity and specificity of MRI and combined biopsy are simultaneously reduced by 19 percentage points. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests MRI followed by targeted MRI/ultrasonography fusion biopsy can be a cost-effective approach to the early detection of PCa.

Targeted biopsy: benefits and limitations.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the current literature regarding the role of multiparametric MRI and fusion-guided biopsies in urologic practice. RECENT FINDINGS: Fusion biopsies consistently show an increase in the detection of clinically significant cancers and decrease in low-risk disease that may be more suitable for active surveillance. Although, when to incorporate multiparametric MRI into workup is not clearly agreed upon, studies have shown a clear benefit in both biopsy naïve and those with prior negative biopsies in determining the appropriate treatment strategy. More recently, cost-analysis models have been published that show that upfront MRIs are more cost-effective when considering missed cancers and treatment courses. SUMMARY: With improved accuracy over systematic biopsies, fusion biopsies are a superior method for detection of the true grade of cancer for both biopsy naïve and patients with prior negative biopsies, choosing appropriate candidates for active surveillance, and monitoring progression on active surveillance.

Cost-effectiveness of MR Imaging-guided Strategies for Detection of Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-Naive Men.

Purpose To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of multiparametric diagnostic magnetic resonance (MR) imaging examination followed by MR imaging-guided biopsy strategies in the detection of prostate cancer in biopsy-naive men presenting with clinical suspicion of cancer for the first time. Materials and Methods A decision-analysis model was created for biopsy-naive men who had been recommended for prostate biopsy on the basis of abnormal digital rectal examination results or elevated prostate-specific antigen levels (age groups: 41-50 years, 51-60 years, and 61-70 years). The following three major strategies were evaluated: (a) standard transrectal ultrasonography (US)-guided biopsy; (b) diagnostic MR imaging followed by MR imaging-targeted biopsy, with no biopsy performed if MR imaging findings were negative; and (c) diagnostic MR imaging followed by MR imaging-targeted biopsy, with a standard biopsy performed when MR imaging findings were negative. The following three MR imaging-guided biopsy strategies were further evaluated in each MR imaging category: (a) biopsy with cognitive guidance, (b) biopsy with MR imaging/US fusion guidance, and (c) in-gantry MR imaging-guided biopsy. Model parameters were derived from the literature. The primary outcome measure was net health benefit (NHB), which was measured as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained or lost by investing resources in a new strategy compared with a standard strategy at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $50 000 per QALY gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed by using Monte Carlo simulations. Results Noncontrast MR imaging followed by cognitively guided MR biopsy (no standard biopsy if MR imaging findings were negative) was the most cost-effective approach, yielding an additional NHB of 0.198 QALY compared with the standard biopsy approach. Noncontrast MR imaging followed by in-gantry MR imaging-guided biopsy (no standard biopsy if MR imaging findings were negative) led to the highest NHB gain of 0.251 additional QALY compared with the standard biopsy strategy. All MR imaging strategies were cost-effective in 94.05% of Monte Carlo simulations. Analysis by age groups yielded similar results. Conclusion MR imaging-guided strategies for the detection of prostate cancer were cost-effective compared with the standard biopsy strategy in a decision-analysis model. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

AUA Policy Statement on the Use of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis, Staging and Management of Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: We summarize the available data about the clinical and economic effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer, and provide practical recommendations for its use in the screening, diagnosis, staging and surveillance of prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A panel of clinicians with expertise in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer evaluated the current published literature on the use and effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging for this disease. When adequate studies were available for analysis, recommendations were made on the basis of data and when adequate studies were not available, recommendations were made on the basis of expert consensus. RESULTS: At this time the data support the use of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with a previous negative biopsy and ongoing concerns about increased risk of prostate cancer. The data regarding its usefulness for initial biopsy suggest a possible role for magnetic resonance imaging in some circumstances. There is currently insufficient evidence to recommend magnetic resonance imaging for screening, staging or surveillance of prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Although it adds cost to the management of prostate cancer, magnetic resonance imaging offers superior anatomic detail, and the ability to evaluate cellular density based on water diffusion and blood flow based on contrast enhancement. Imaging targeted biopsy may increase the diagnosis of clinically significant cancers by identifying specific lesions not visible on conventional ultrasound. The clinical indications for the use of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of prostate cancer are rapidly evolving.

Ultrasound-Guided Core-Needle Versus Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy: A Cost Analysis Based on the American Society of Breast Surgeons' Mastery of Breast Surgery Registry.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost-efficacy of vacuum-assisted ultrasound-guided breast biopsy instruments compared to ultrasound-guided 14-gauge spring-loaded core-needle biopsy. METHODS: The American Society of Breast Surgeons' Mastery of Breast Surgery Registry was reviewed. Biopsy findings, any rebiopsy, and the instrument used were abstracted for 31,451 ultrasound-guided biopsy procedures performed between 2001 and July 2014. Rates of cancer diagnosis and rebiopsy were calculated for each instrument. A linear mathematical model was developed to calculate total cost per cancer diagnosis, including procedural costs and the costs of any additional surgical rebiopsy procedures. Mean cost per cancer diagnosis with confidence limits was then determined for 14-gauge spring-loaded core-needle biopsy and 14 different vacuum-assisted instruments. For 14-gauge spring-loaded core-needle biopsy, mean cost per cancer diagnosis was $4346 (4327-$4366). For the vacuum-assisted instruments, mean cost per cancer diagnosis ranged from a low of $3742 ($3732-$3752) to a high of $4779 ($4750-$4809). RESULTS: Vacuum-assisted instruments overall were more cost-effective than core with a mean cost per cancer diagnosis of $4052 ($4038-$4067) (p < 0.05). Tethered vacuum-assisted instruments performed best with a mean cost per cancer diagnosis of $3978 ($3964-$3991) (p < 0.05). Nontethered devices had a mean cost per cancer diagnosis of $4369 ($4350-$4388), a result no better than core (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy had a lower mean cost per cancer diagnosis than 14-gauge spring-loaded core-needle biopsy. This advantage was only seen in tethered vacuum-assisted instruments. Within device families, larger instruments tended to outperform smaller instruments.

Cost-Effectiveness Comparison of Imaging-Guided Prostate Biopsy Techniques: Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound, Direct In-Bore MRI, and Image Fusion.

OBJECTIVE: Three commonly used prostate biopsy approaches are systematic transrectal ultrasound guided, direct in-bore MRI guided, and image fusion guided. The aim of this study was to calculate which strategy is most cost-effective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A decision tree and Markov model were developed to compare cost-effectiveness. Literature review and expert opinion were used as input. A strategy was deemed cost-effective if the costs of gaining one quality-adjusted life year (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio) did not exceed the willingness-to-pay threshold of €80,000 (≈$85,000 in January 2017). A base case analysis was performed to compare systematic transrectal ultrasound- and image fusion-guided biopsies. Because of a lack of appropriate literature regarding the accuracy of direct in-bore MRI-guided biopsy, a threshold analysis was performed. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for fusion-guided biopsy compared with systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy was €1386 ($1470) per quality-adjusted life year gained, which was below the willingness-to-pay threshold and thus assumed cost-effective. If MRI findings are normal in a patient with clinically significant prostate cancer, the sensitivity of direct in-bore MRI-guided biopsy has to be at least 88.8%. If that is the case, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is €80,000 per quality-adjusted life year gained and thus cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Fusion-guided biopsy seems to be cost-effective compared with systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. Future research is needed to determine whether direct in-bore MRI-guided biopsy is the best pathway; in this study a threshold was calculated at which it would be cost-effective.

Conventional versus Ultrasound-Guided Transbronchial Needle Aspiration for the Diagnosis of Hilar/Mediastinal Lymph Adenopathies: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Conventional transbronchial needle aspiration (c-TBNA) and endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) are both valuable diagnostic techniques for the diagnosis of hilar/mediastinal lesions. Although a superiority of EBUS-TBNA over c-TBNA may be expected, evidence-based data on a direct comparison between these 2 procedures are still lacking. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to test the superiority of EBUS-TBNA over c-TBNA in a randomized trial and to evaluate the cost-effectiveness profile of a staged strategy, including c-TBNA as initial test followed by EBUS-TBNA, in case of inconclusive results at rapid on-site evaluation. METHODS: Eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to either the EBUS-TBNA or c-TBNA group. The primary endpoint was to test the superiority of EBUS-TBNA sensitivity over c-TBNA. The secondary endpoints included the sensitivity of the staged strategy, as well as costs and safety related to each procedure and to their sequential combination. RESULTS: A total of 253 patients were randomized to either EBUS-TBNA (n = 127) or c-TBNA (n = 126), and 31 patients of the c-TBNA group subsequently underwent EBUS-TBNA. The sensitivity of EBUS-TBNA was higher, but not significantly superior to that of c-TBNA (respectively. 92% [95% CI 87-97] and 82% [95% CI 75-90], p > 0.05). The sensitivity of the staged strategy was 94% (95% CI 89-98). No major adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: EBUS-TBNA was the single best diagnostic tool, although not significantly superior to c-TBNA. Due to the favorable cost-effectiveness profile of their sequential combination, in selected scenarios with a high probability of success from the standard procedure, these should not be necessarily intended as competitive and the staged strategy could be considered in clinical practice.

Use of Lymph Node Ultrasound Prior to Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in 384 Patients with Melanoma: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. / Valor de la ecografía ganglionar previa a la biopsia del ganglio centinela en 384 pacientes con melanoma: análisis de coste-efectividad.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Locoregional lymph node ultrasound is not typically included in guidelines as part of the staging process prior to sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). The objective of the present study was to make a clinical and economic analysis of lymph node ultrasound prior to SLNB. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 384 patients with clinical stage I-II primary melanoma who underwent locorregional lymph node ultrasound (with or without ultrasound-guided biopsy) prior to SLNB between 2004 and 2015. We evaluated the reliability and cost-effectiveness of the strategy. RESULTS: Use of locorregional lymph node ultrasound avoided SLNB in 23 patients (6%). Ultrasound had a sensitivity of 46% and specificity of 76% for the detection of metastatic lymph nodes that were not clinically palpable. False negatives were significantly more common in patients aged over 60 years and in tumors with a thickness of less than 2mm. The staging process using SLNB and ultrasound with ultrasound-guided biopsy produced an increase of €16.30 in the unit price. Our cost-effectiveness analysis identified the staging protocol with ultrasound and SLNB as the dominant strategy, with a lower cost-effectiveness ratio than the alternative, consisting of SLNB alone (8,095.24 vs. €28,605.00). CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnostic staging of melanoma prior to SLNB is a useful and cost-effective tool. This procedure does not substitute SLNB, though it does allow to avoid SLNB in a not insignificant proportion of patients.

Safety, Utilization, and Cost of Image-Guided Percutaneous Liver Biopsy Among Cancer Patients.

Image-guided percutaneous liver biopsy (PLB) is a diagnostic tool for lesions in the liver. Hemorrhage is the most common complication. We selected patients with a diagnostic claim for cancer who had undergone PLB. There were a total of 26,941 patients who underwent PLB. Hemorrhage risk was 1.43% among patients undergoing PLB. When stratified by setting, odds of hemorrhage were 4.5 times higher when biopsy was performed in an inpatient setting (p < .001). Risk factors associated with hemorrhage included marital status, liver cancer and comorbidity score. The use of PLB has increased over time. Reassuringly, the hemorrhage risk associated with PLB is low.

Overutilization and Cost of Advanced Imaging for Long-Bone Cartilaginous Lesions.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence and cost of unnecessary advanced imaging studies (AIS) in the evaluation of long bone cartilaginous lesions have not been studied previously. METHODS: A total of 105 enchondromas and 19 chondrosarcomas arising in long bones from July 2008 until April 2012 in 121 patients were reviewed. Advanced imaging was defined as MRI, CT, bone scan, skeletal survey, or CT biopsy. Two blinded radiologists independently reviewed the initial imaging study and determined if further imaging was indicated based on that imaging study alone. The cost of imaging was taken from our institution's global charge list. Imaging was deemed unnecessary if it was not recommended by our radiologists after review of the initial imaging study. The difference in cost was calculated by subtracting the cost of imaging recommended by each radiologist from the cost of unnecessary imaging. The sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing enchondromas from chondrosarcomas was calculated. A minimum of 2 years from diagnosis of an enchondroma was required to monitor for malignant transformation. RESULTS: Of patients diagnosed with an enchondroma, 85 % presented with AIS. The average enchondroma patient presented with one unnecessary AIS. The radiologists' interpretations agreed 85 % of the time for enchondromas and 100 % for chondrosarcomas. The sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing enchondromas from chondrosarcomas was 95 % for one radiologist and 87 and 95 % for the other. The average unnecessary cost per enchondroma patient was $1,346.18. CONCLUSIONS: Unnecessary AIS are frequently performed and are a significant source of expense. The imaging algorithms outlined in this study may reduce unnecessary AIS.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of different anesthesia strategies for transperineal MRI/US fusion prostate biopsy.

This study aims to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of three different anesthesia strategies, namely chatting while under local anesthesia (Chat-LA), total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA), and general anesthesia with laryngeal mask airway (GA-LMA), employed in transperineal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/ultrasound (US) fusion prostate biopsy (TP-MUF-PB). A retrospective study was conducted involving 1202 patients who underwent TP-MUF-PB from June 2016 to April 2023 at The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University (Suzhou, China). Clinical data and outcomes, including total costs, complications, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), were compared. Probability sensitivity and subgroup analyses were also performed. Chat-LA was found to be the most cost-effective option, outperforming both TIVA and GA-LMA. However, subgroup analyses revealed that in younger patients (under 65 years old) and those with smaller prostate volumes (<40 ml), TIVA emerged as a more cost-effective strategy. While Chat-LA may generally be the most cost-effective and safer anesthesia method for TP-MUF-PB, personalization of anesthesia strategies is crucial, considering specific patient demographics such as age and prostate volume.

Routine on-site evaluation of specimen adequacy during initial ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of thyroid nodules: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: On-site evaluation (OSE) of specimen adequacy during fine needle aspiration (FNA) of thyroid nodules reduces unsatisfactory results but adds cost. We hypothesized that the addition of routine OSE to initial ultrasound-guided FNA of thyroid nodules is not cost-effective. METHODS: Formal cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using a decision model to compare strategies of routine initial OSE versus restriction of OSE to cases of prior inadequate FNA. Adequacy rates for FNA without OSE and detriment to quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) for undergoing repeat FNA were estimated on the basis of literature review and institutional experience. Costs were estimated using Medicare limiting charges and Bureau of Labor Statistics wage rates. Sensitivity analysis was used to examine the uncertainty of the model variable estimates. RESULTS: The routine OSE strategy produced a gain of 0.00007 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at an additional cost of $43.75 for an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $639,143/QALY when compared to restriction of OSE to cases with prior inadequate results. During sensitivity analysis, routine OSE became cost-effective if FNA adequacy rate without OSE decreased from 90 to 85 %, cost of OSE decreased from $116 to $75, cost of FNA increased from $366 to $735, hourly wage increased from $23 to $123, or QALE detriment for repeat FNA increased from 0.25 to 1.6 days. CONCLUSIONS: OSE for initial ultrasound-guided FNA of thyroid nodules is not cost-effective unless the adequacy rate without OSE is less than 85 %. When operator performance exceeds this rate, OSE should be reserved for cases with previous inadequate results.

Image-guided pleural biopsy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The most efficient and cost-effective approach to pleural exudates not diagnosed by means of thoracocentesis remains uncertain. Both closed pleural biopsy and thoracoscopy may be utilized for the acquisition of pleural tissue. This review will focus on the developments in image guidance of closed pleural biopsy. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies suggest that computed tomography and ultrasound guidance improve the yield and safety of closed pleural biopsy. Imaging is best suited to reduce the rate of false-negative biopsy in malignant pleural disease by enhanced targeting of localized pleural changes typically situated dorsolaterally close to the diaphragm. Pleural tuberculosis causes effusions with discrete and uniformly distributed pleural thickening, and evidence suggests that the utilization of imaging has little advantage in this setting apart from decreasing the risk associated with blind biopsy. Imaging also facilitates a directed repeat thoracocentesis in the same session. The cumulative yield of image-assisted repeat thoracocentesis and pleural biopsy has been reported to approach that of thoracoscopy, particularly in cases with pleural thickening, nodularity or pleural-based mass lesions. SUMMARY: Image-guided pleural biopsy combined with repeat thoracocentesis is a safe, inexpensive, accessible and sensitive method for further examination of patients with pleural exudates not diagnosed by initial thoracocentesis.