An Initial Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Magnetic Resonance-Guided Laser Interstitial Thermal Therapy in Pediatric Epilepsy Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Magnetic resonance-guided laser interstitial thermal therapy (MRgLITT) is a new technology that provides a clinically efficacious and minimally invasive alternative to conventional microsurgical resection. However, little data exist on how costs compare to traditional open surgery. The goal of this paper is to investigate the cost-effectiveness of MRgLITT in the treatment of pediatric epilepsy. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of pediatric patients who underwent MRgLITT via the Visualase® thermal therapy system (Medtronic, Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA) between December 2013 and September 2017. Direct costs associated with preoperative, operative, and follow-up care were extracted. Benefit was calculated in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the cost-effectiveness was derived from the discounted total direct costs over QALY. Sensitivity analysis on 4 variables was utilized to assess the validity of our results. RESULTS: Twelve consecutive pediatric patients with medically refractory epilepsy underwent MRgLITT procedures. At the last postoperative follow-up, 8 patients were seizure free (Engel I, 66.7%), 2 demonstrated significant improvement (Engel II, 16.7%), and 2 patients showed worthwhile improvement (Engel III, 16.7%). The average cumulative discounted QALY was 2.11 over the lifetime of a patient. Adjusting for inflation, MRgLITT procedures had a cost-effectiveness of USD 22,211 per QALY. Our sensitivity analysis of cost variables is robust and supports the procedure to be cost--effective. CONCLUSION: Our data suggests that MRgLITT may be a cost-effective alternative to traditional surgical resection in pediatric epilepsy surgery.

Colonic transit: what is the impact of a diverting loop ileostomy?

BACKGROUND: Diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) is used following low anterior resections (LAR) or ultra-low anterior resections (ULAR) to reduce anastomotic leak (AL). Preoperative mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) is traditionally used with DLI. However, clearance of the left colon can be achieved with a fleet enema without the physiological compromise of MBP. We aimed to assess colonic transit following DLI in this context. METHODS: A prospective, observational study was performed with patients with rectal cancer undergoing LAR or ULAR in a tertiary colorectal unit with preoperative fleet enema. Radiopaque markers were inserted into the caecum following rectal resection and formation of a DLI with placement confirmed by image intensifier and endoscopy. X-rays were performed at days 1, 3, 5 and 14 post-operation with data collected prospectively. RESULTS: Ten patients (mean age 57, nine males) were enrolled. Mean time to functioning stoma was 1.9 days (range 1-3). There was no movement in the majority of markers in all patients at Day 5 post-operation. In all seven patients with Day 14 X-rays, the majority of markers remained in the right colon. Two patients had delayed AL, with markers found within the pelvis in both of these patients. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to assess colonic transit following DLI using fleet enema only, with results suggesting colonic motility is abolished in this setting. The use of a fleet enema without MBP may be sufficient prior to rectal resection surgery when DLI is employed. AL may actually increase colonic transit. Further research is warranted.