Deep Brain Stimulation Compared With Contingency Management for the Treatment of Cocaine Use Disorders: A Threshold and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Cocaine is the second most frequently used illicit drug worldwide (after cannabis), and cocaine use disorder (CUD)-related deaths increased globally by 80% from 1990 to 2013. There is yet to be a regulatory-approved treatment. Emerging preclinical evidence indicates that deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the nucleus accumbens may be a therapeutic option. Prior to expanding the costly investigation of DBS for treatment of CUD, it is important to ensure societal cost-effectiveness. AIMS: We conducted a threshold and cost-effectiveness analysis to determine the success rate at which DBS would be equivalent to contingency management (CM), recently identified as the most efficacious therapy for treatments of CUDs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Quality of life, efficacy, and safety parameters for CM were obtained from previous literature. Costs were calculated from a societal perspective. Our model predicted the utility benefit based on quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental-cost-effectiveness ratio resulting from two treatments on a one-, two-, and five-year timeline. RESULTS: On a one-year timeline, DBS would need to impart a success rate (ie, cocaine free) of 70% for it to yield the same utility benefit (0.492 QALYs per year) as CM. At no success rate would DBS be more cost-effective (incremental-cost-effectiveness ratio <$50,000) than CM during the first year. Nevertheless, as DBS costs are front loaded, DBS would need to achieve success rates of 74% and 51% for its cost-effectiveness to exceed that of CM over a two- and five-year period, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We find DBS would not be cost-effective in the short term (one year) but may be cost-effective in longer timelines. Since DBS holds promise to potentially be a cost-effective treatment for CUDs, future randomized controlled trials should be performed to assess its efficacy.

Anterior temporal lobectomy compared with laser thermal hippocampectomy for mesial temporal epilepsy: A threshold analysis study.

PURPOSE: Anterior Temporal Lobectomy (ATL) is the gold standard surgical treatment for refractory temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE), but it carries the risks associated with invasiveness, including cognitive and visual deficits and potential damage to eloquent structures. Laser thermal hippocampectomy (LTH) is a new procedure that offers a less invasive alternative to the standard open approach. In this decision analysis, we determine the seizure freedom rate at which LTH would be equivalent to ATL. METHODS: MEDLINE searches were performed for studies of ATL from 1995 to 2014. Using complication and success rates from the literature, we constructed a decision analysis model for treatment with ATL and LTH. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were derived from examining patient preferences in similar clinical conditions. LTH data were obtained from a preliminary multicenter study report following patients for 6-12 months. A sensitivity analysis in which major parameters were systematically varied within their 95% CIs was used. RESULTS: 350 studies involving 25,144 cases of ATL were included. Outcomes of LTH were taken from a recently presented multicenter series of 68 cases. Over a 10-year postoperative modeling period, LTH value was 5.9668 QALYs and ATL value was 5.8854. Sensitivity analysis revealed that probabilities of seizure control and late morbidity of LTH are most likely to affect outcomes compared to ATL. We calculated that LTH would need to stop disabling seizures (Engel class I) in at least 43% of cases and have fewer than 40% late mortality/morbidity to result in quality of life at least as good as that after ATL. CONCLUSIONS: This decision analysis based on early follow-up data suggests LTH has similar utility to ATL. These early data support LTH as a potentially comparable less invasive alternative to ATL in refractory TLE. LTH utility may remain comparable to ATL even if long-term seizure control is less than that of ATL. Larger prospective studies with long-term follow up will be needed to validate the true role of LTH in the refractory epilepsy patient population.

Anterior surgical management of single-level cervical disc disease: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis with decision analysis and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: To determine the relative cost-effectiveness of anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (with autograft, allograft, or spacers), anterior cervical discectomy without fusion (ACD), and cervical disc replacement (CDR) for the treatment of 1-level cervical disc disease. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There is debate as to the optimal anterior surgical strategy to treat single-level cervical disc disease. Surgical strategies include 3 techniques of anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (autograft, allograft, or spacer-assisted fusion), ACD, and CDR. Several controlled trials have compared these treatments but have yielded mixed results. Decision analysis provides a structure for making a quantitative comparison of the costs and outcomes of each treatment. METHODS: A literature search was performed and yielded 156 case series that fulfilled our search criteria describing nearly 17,000 cases. Data were abstracted from these publications and pooled meta-analytically to estimate the incidence of various outcomes, including index-level and adjacent-level reoperation. A decision analytic model calculated the expected costs in US dollars and outcomes in quality-adjusted life years for a typical adult patient with 1-level cervical radiculopathy subjected to each of the 5 approaches. RESULTS: At 5 years postoperatively, patients who had undergone ACD alone had significantly (P < 0.001) more quality-adjusted life years (4.885 ± 0.041) than those receiving other treatments. Patients with ACD also exhibited highly significant (P < 0.001) differences in costs, incurring the lowest societal costs ($16,558 ± $539). Follow-up data were inadequate for comparison beyond 5 years. CONCLUSION: The results of our decision analytic model indicate advantages for ACD, both in effectiveness and costs, over other strategies. Thus, ACD is a cost-effective alternative to anterior cervical discectomy with fusion and CDR in patients with single-level cervical disc disease. Definitive conclusions about degenerative changes after ACD and adjacent-level disease after CDR await longer follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Endoscopic versus open resection of tuberculum sellae meningiomas: a decision analysis.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Tuberculum sellae meningiomas (TSMs) are challenging tumors for surgical resection. Endoscopic endonasal (EE) approaches to these lesions have not been directly compared to open craniotomy in a controlled trial. METHODS: We searched Medline and Embase online databases for English-language articles containing key words related to TSMs. Data were pooled, including 5 of our own patients reported here for the first time. Metaregression was used and a decision-analytical model was constructed to compare outcomes between open microsurgery and EE approaches. RESULTS: The overall quality of life (QOL) was not significantly different between the approaches (p = 0.410); however, there were large differences in individual complication rates. The Monte Carlo simulation yielded an overall average QOL in craniotomy patients of 0.915 and in endoscopic patients of 0.952. Endoscopy had a higher CSF leak rate (26.8 vs. 3.5%, p < 0.001) but a lower rate of injury to the optic apparatus (1.4 vs. 9.2%, p < 0.001) compared with craniotomy. The 3-year recurrence rates were not statistically different (p = 0.529). CONCLUSION: EE resection of TSMs appears to be a comparable alternative to traditional open microsurgical resection with respect to overall QOL based on available publications. A meaningful comparison of recurrence rates will require a longer follow-up.

Indications for CT scanning in mild traumatic brain injury: A cost-effectiveness study.

BACKGROUND: There is considerable uncertainty about the indications for cranial computed tomography (CT) scanning in patient with minor traumatic brain injury (TBI). This analysis involves an evidence-based comparison of several strategies for selecting patients for CT with regard to effectiveness and cost. METHODS: We performed a structured literature review of mild traumatic brain injury and constructed a cost-effectiveness model. The model estimated the impact of missed intracranial lesions on longevity, quality of life and costs. Using a 20-year-old patient for primary analysis, we compared the following strategies to screen for the need to perform a CT scan: observation in the emergency department or hospital floor, skull radiography, Selective CT based on the presence of additional risk factors and scanning all. RESULTS: Outcome measures for each strategy included average years of life, quality of life and costs. Selective CT and the CT All policy performed significantly better than the alternatives with respect to outcome. They were also less expensive in terms of total direct health care costs, although the differences did not reach statistical significance. The model yielded similar, but smaller, differences between the selective imaging and other strategies when run for older patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although the incidence of intracranial lesions, especially those that require surgery, is low in mild TBI, the consequences of delayed diagnosis are forbidding. Adverse outcome of an intracranial hematoma is so costly that it more than balances the expense of CT scans. In our cost-effectiveness model, the liberal use of CT scanning in mild TBI appears justified.