Real-world cost- effectiveness analysis: Tumor Treating Fields for newly diagnosed glioblastoma in China.

BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma (GBM) stands as the most aggressive and prevalent primary brain malignancy. Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields), an innovative therapy complementing chemotherapy for GBM treatment, which can significantly enhance overall survival, disease progression-free survival, and patient's quality of life. However, there is a dearth of health economics evaluation on TTFields therapy both domestically and internationally. OBJECTIVE: The study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of TTFields + temozolomide (TMZ) in comparison to TMZ alone for newly diagnosed GBM patients. The intent is to provide robust economic evidence to serve as a foundation for policymaking and decision-making processes in GBM treatment. METHODS: We estimated outcomes for newly diagnosed GBM patients over a lifetime horizon using a partitioned survival model with three states: Progression-Free Survival, Progression Disease, and Death. The survival model was derived from a real-world study in China, with long-term survival data drawn from GBM epidemiology literature. Adverse event rates were sourced from the EF-14 trial data. Cost data, validated by expert consultation, was obtained from public literature and databases. Utility values were extracted from published literature. Using Microsoft Excel, we calculated expected costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over 15 years from a health system perspective. The willingness-to-pay threshold was set at three times the Chinese per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2022, amounting to CN¥242,928 (US$37,655) /QALY. A 5% discount rate was applied to costs and utilities. Results underwent analysis through single factor and probability sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: TTFields + TMZ demonstrated a mean increase in cost by CN¥389,326 (US$57,859) and an increase of 2.46 QALYs compared to TMZ alone. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was CN¥157,979 (US$23,474) per QALY gained. The model exhibited heightened sensitivity to changes in the discount rate. Probability sensitivity analysis indicates that, under the existing threshold, the probability of TTFields + TMZ being economical is 95.60%. CONCLUSIONS: This cost-effectiveness analysis affirms that incorporating TTFields into TMZ treatment proves to be cost-effective, given a threshold three times the Chinese per capita GDP.

Dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRG-s) for potential resolution of restless leg syndrome symptoms and increased cost savings for patients: A case study.

INTRODUCTION: We report successful use of dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRG-s) to treat a patient with persistent symptoms of restless leg syndrome (RLS). METHODS: The treatment involved the placement of a small device millimeters away from the patient's DRG, which are nerves near the spinal cord that carry sensory information from the periphery of the body to the brain. The device automatically delivers electrical impulse to the DRG to alter and decrease pain perception in the brain. RESULTS: Our case report elucidates the use of this procedure as a targeted therapy for RLS, with a nearly 90% reduction in reported symptoms in our patient, thus potentially reducing morbidity associated with this condition. Furthermore, we report a 10-year cost savings of nearly $90,000 following DRG-s for our patient. CONCLUSION: This case study aims to demonstrate the effectiveness of DRG-s neuromodulation in managing RLS, a condition that is often difficult and costly to treat.

Effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of sacral neuromodulation for idiopathic slow-transit constipation: a systematic review.

AIM: Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) is a minimally invasive treatment option for functional constipation. Evidence regarding its effectiveness is contradictory, driven by heterogeneous study populations and designs. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of SNM in children and adults with refractory idiopathic slow-transit constipation (STC). METHOD: OVID Medline, OVID Embase, Cochrane Library, the KSR Evidence Database, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database and the International HTA Database were searched up to 25 May 2023. For effectiveness outcomes, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected. For safety outcomes, all study designs were selected. For cost-effectiveness outcomes, trial- and model-based economic evaluations were selected for review. Study selection, risk of bias and quality assessment, and data extraction were independently performed by two reviewers. For the intervention 'sacral neuromodulation' effectiveness outcomes included defaecation frequency and constipation severity. Safety and cost-effectiveness outcomes were, respectively, adverse events and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. RESULTS: Of 1390 records reviewed, 67 studies were selected for full-text screening. For effectiveness, one cross-over and one parallel-group RCT was included, showing contradictory results. Eleven studies on safety were included (four RCTs, three prospective cohort studies and four retrospective cohort studies). Overall infection rates varied between 0% and 22%, whereas reoperation rates varied between 0% and 29%. One trial-based economic evaluation was included, which concluded that SNM was not cost-effective compared with personalized conservative treatment at a time horizon of 6 months. The review findings are limited by the small number of available studies and the heterogeneity in terms of study populations, definitions of refractory idiopathic STC and study designs. CONCLUSION: Evidence for the (cost-)effectiveness of SNM in children and adults with refractory idiopathic STC is inconclusive. Reoperation rates of up to 29% were reported.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Between Sacral Neuromodulation and OnabotulinumtoxinA for the Treatment of Refractory Overactive Bladder in Women: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: We summarized the evidence evaluating the cost-effectiveness of sacral neuromodulation (SNM) versus onabotulinumtoxinA (BONT/A) in the treatment of refractory overactive bladder (OAB) among women. METHODS: We searched PubMed Medline (1946-2019), EMBASE (1947-2019), Web of Science (1900-2019), Clinical Trials.gov, reviewed references of included studies, and Cochrane subsets of CDSR, DARE, CENTRAL, and NHSEED. We included cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses or decision analysis comparing SNM versus BONT/A in women with nonneurogenic refractory OAB. Primary outcomes included incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), reported as cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), which were abstracted or calculated. RESULTS: Five studies met the inclusion criteria. Three studies were industry supported. Two studies of high quality found BONT/A to be dominant over SNM (ICER range of $415,571/QALY at 5 years and $236,370/QALY at 10 years). This trend was further supported by a third study of high quality that favored BONT/A because SNM was not cost-effective (ICER, $116,427/QALY at 2 years). In contrast, 2 other studies of lower quality found that SNM was cost-effective or dominant in comparison to BONT/A (ICER range, $3,717/QALY to €15,226/QALY at 10 years). In general, models were sensitive to treatment duration, intervention setting, and lacked robust data on long-term outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: OnabotulinumtoxinA is more cost-effective for managing refractory OAB when compared with SNM. However, it remains unclear whether this finding holds true long term for what is considered a lifelong condition.

Cost-impact analysis of baroreflex activation therapy in chronic heart failure patients in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The study evaluated the cost of baroreflex activation therapy plus guideline directed therapy (BAT + GDT) compared to GDT alone for HF patients with reduced ejection fraction and New York Heart Association Class III or II (with a recent history of III). Baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) is delivered by an implantable device that stimulates the baroreceptors through an electrode attached to the outside of the carotid artery, which rebalances the autonomic nervous system to regain cardiovascular (CV) homeostasis. The BeAT-HF trial evaluated the safety and effectiveness of BAT. METHODS: A cost impact model was developed from a U.S. health care payer or integrated delivery network perspective over a 3-year period for BAT + GDT versus GDT alone. Expected costs were calculated by utilizing 6-month data from the BeAT-HF trial and existing literature. HF hospitalization rates were extrapolated based on improvement in NT-proBNP. RESULTS: At baseline the expected cost of BAT + GDT were $29,526 per patient more than GDT alone due to BAT device and implantation costs. After 3 years, the predicted cost per patient was $9521 less expensive for BAT + GDT versus GDT alone due to lower rates of significant HF hospitalizations, CV non-HF hospitalizations, and resource intensive late-stage procedures (LVADs and heart transplants) among the BAT + GDT group. CONCLUSIONS: BAT + GDT treatment becomes less costly than GDT alone beginning between years 1 and 2 and becomes less costly cumulatively between years 2 and 3, potentially providing significant savings over time. As additional BeAT-HF trial data become available, the model can be updated to show longer term effects.

National Patterns of Filled Prescriptions and Third-Line Treatment Utilization for Privately Insured Women With Overactive Bladder.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate national patterns of care for women with overactive bladder (OAB) in an administrative data set and identify potential areas for improvement. METHODS: We performed an analysis using the OptumLabs Data Warehouse, which contains deidentified administrative claims data from a large national US health insurance plan. The study included women, older than 18 years, with a new OAB diagnosis from January 1, 2007, to June 30, 2017. We excluded those with an underlying neurologic etiology, with interstitial cystitis/painful bladder syndrome, were pregnant, or did not have continuous enrollment for 12 months before and after OAB diagnosis. Trends in management were assessed via the Cochran-Armitage test. Time to discontinuation among medications was compared using t test. RESULTS: Of 1.4 million women in the database during the study time frame, 60,246 (4%) were included in the study. Median age was 61 years [interquartile range (IQR), 50-73], and median follow-up was 2.6 years (IQR, 1.6-4.2). Overall, 37% were treated with anticholinergics, 5% with beta-3 agonists, 7% with topical estrogen, and 2% with pelvic floor physical therapy; 26% saw a specialist; and 2% underwent third-line therapy. Median time to cessation of prescription filling was longer for beta-3 agonists versus anticholinergics [median, 4.1 months (IQR, 1-15) vs 3.6 months (IQR, 1-10); P < 0.0001]. Use of third-line therapies significantly increased over the study time frame, from 1.1% to 2.2% (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Most of the patients do not continue filling prescriptions for OAB medications, and a minority of patients were referred for specialty evaluation. Although third-line therapy use is increasing, it is used in a small proportion of women with OAB. Given these patterns, there may be underutilization of specialist referral and other OAB therapies.

Cost Effectiveness of Sacral Neuromodulation and OnabotulinumtoxinA in Managing Refractory Idiopathic Overactive Bladder.

Little information from clinical and modelled studies are available on cost effectiveness of OnabotulinumtoxinA and SNM for the treatment of idiopathic overactive bladder. We aimed to summarize the evidence in this regard from different healthcare systems. Seven studies from 5 countries were reviewed. Some modelled studies with a 10-year time frame showed that sacral neuromodulation became dominant long-term; others suggested OnabotulinumtoxinA was more cost effective at <5 years. There was considerable heterogeneity in the base case/sensitivity analysis and statistical modelling among the studies. Clinical studies with longer term follow-up will help determine cost effectiveness more accurately.

Treatment patterns and costs among patients with OAB treated with combination oral therapy, sacral nerve stimulation, percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation, or onabotulinumtoxinA in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment patterns and costs were characterized among patients with overactive bladder (OAB) receiving later-line target therapies (combination mirabegron/antimuscarinic, sacral nerve stimulation [SNS], percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation [PTNS], or onabotulinumtoxinA). METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study using 2013 to 2017 MarketScan databases, two partially overlapping cohorts of adults with OAB ("IPT cohort": patients with incident OAB pharmacotherapy use; "ITT cohort," incident target therapy) with continuous enrollment were identified; first use was index. Demographic characteristics, treatment patterns and costs over the 24-month follow-up period were summarized. Crude mean (standard deviation [SD]) OAB-specific (assessed by OAB diagnostic code or pharmaceutical dispensation record) costs were estimated according to target therapy. RESULTS: The IPT cohort comprised 54 066 individuals (mean [SD] age 58.5 [15.0] years; 76% female), the ITT cohort, 1662 individuals (mean [SD] age 62.8 [14.9] years; 83% female). Seventeen percent of the IPT cohort were treated with subsequent line(s) of therapy after index therapy; among those, 73% received antimuscarinics, 23% mirabegron, and 1.4% a target therapy. For the ITT cohort, 32% were initially treated with SNS, 27% with onabotulinumtoxinA, 26% with combination mirabegron/antimuscarinic, and 15% with PTNS. Subsequently, one-third of this cohort received additional therapies. Mean (SD) costs were lowest among patients receiving index therapy PTNS ($6959 [$7533]) and highest for SNS ($29 702 [$26 802]). CONCLUSIONS: Costs for SNS over 24 months are substantially higher than other treatments. A treatment patterns analysis indicates that oral therapies predominate; first-line combination therapy is common in the ITT cohort and uptake of oral therapy after procedural options is substantial.

Economic analysis of Electrical Muscle Stimulator with Multipath technology for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence: a UK-based cost-utility analysis.

Background: Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a debilitating and highly prevalent condition in the UK. The condition is associated with a significant economic burden for affected patients and society. Current treatment options for SUI include minimally invasive therapies, medication and surgical intervention for the most serious cases. Electrical Muscle Stimulator with Multipath technology is a recently developed device for the treatment of SUI that relies on neuromuscular external electrical stimulation (NEES) technology. The clinical efficacy of the device has been proven in previous studies, but existing evidence surrounding its economic viability is limited.Objectives: To assess the cost-utility of the Electrical Muscle Stimulator with Multipath technology Therapy device for the treatment of SUI amongst women in a UK setting.Methods: An economic model was developed to consider the cost-utility (cost per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] gained) of Electrical Muscle Stimulator with Multipath technology compared with current practice. A Markov model was developed, with costs and health effects estimated over the lifetime of the patient in the base-case analysis. The model was developed to reflect the treatment pathways typically followed by patients with SUI in the UK. Parameter uncertainty was explored in deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.Results: Base-case results indicate that Electrical Muscle Stimulator with Multipath technology results in cost savings and QALY gains over the patient's lifetime. In the "cure" analysis, the intervention is £250 less costly and leads to a 0.03 QALY gain per patient, while in the "improvement analysis", the intervention is £327 less costly and leads to a 0.13 QALY gain per patient. Results from the probabilistic sensitivity analyses show that the likelihood of Electrical Muscle Stimulator with Multipath technology being cost-effective is greater than 74% across all willingness-to-pay thresholds in the two analyses presented.Conclusions: Electrical Muscle Stimulator with Multipath technology is a potentially cost-effective treatment option for patients with SUI who have failed first-line treatment. It could reduce costs to the health care service and improve quality-of-life for selected patients over their lifetime.

Single Institutional Experience with Single Stage Sacral Neuromodulation: Cost Savings and Outcomes in a Contemporary Case Series.

PURPOSE: Sacral neuromodulation is traditionally performed in 2 stages. Studies have projected that 1-stage sacral neuromodulation is cost-effective if the conversion rate is 61.3% or greater. To our knowledge we present the first case series in the literature to evaluate the cost of 1-stage sacral neuromodulation. The objective of our study was to evaluate outcomes and analyze cost using our institutional experience with 1-stage sacral neuromodulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 15 consecutive 1-stage sacral neuromodulation procedures were performed at a self-insured, integrated health care institution. Cost data were determined using 2019 Medicare reimbursement rates for CPT codes 64581, 64585, 64590 and 64595. Median operative time was derived from actual institutional data. RESULTS: One-stage sacral neuromodulation implantation was performed in 15 patients. Median followup was 14.6 months (IQR 6.9-22.5). Of the 15 cases 14 (93.3%) were successful, defined as a 50% or greater improvement from baseline. Total reimbursement for the 15 patients who underwent 1-stage implantation was $329,430. If these patients had undergone traditional 2-stage implantation with equivalent outcomes, the overall reimbursement was determined to be $414,796. Single-stage sacral neuromodulation implantation provided a calculated total cost savings of $85,366 (p <0.01). Moreover, a projected 233 minutes in operative time was saved by performing 1-stage sacral neuromodulation (p <0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the potential health care savings of a 1-stage sacral neuromodulation procedure. Moreover, 1-stage sacral neuromodulation may have other added benefits, such as reduced infection rates, patient satisfaction and other indirect cost savings, including reduced time off from work.

Tumor treating fields for glioblastoma: should it or will it ever be adopted?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to discuss how a new treatment modality, tumor treating fields, may be incorporated into the oncologic care for patients with glioblastoma. RECENT FINDINGS: Tumor treating fields are a new treatment modality available to patients with newly diagnosed and recurrent glioblastoma. Alternating electric fields are delivered via a wearable, removable device affixed to the scalp of patients with supratentorial glioblastoma. With continuous use, the application of tumor treating fields combined with temozolomide chemotherapy has been shown to improve overall survival compared with temozolomide alone in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Adverse events attributable to the device are limited to localized skin reactions. Despite compendium guidelines in support of its use and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, tumor treating fields have been slow to be adopted in the neuro-oncology community. Critics have raised concerns about the generalizability of the study data, patient quality of life, and mechanism of action of this therapy. SUMMARY: Tumor treating fields are available for the treatment of both newly diagnosed and recurrent glioblastoma and represent a new category of treatment modalities in oncologic therapy. This novel device has received FDA approval but has been slow to be adopted into clinical practice.

To stage or not to stage?-A cost minimization analysis of sacral neuromodulation placement strategies.

AIMS: Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) is a standard therapy for refractory overactive bladder (OAB). Traditionally, SNM placement involves placement of an S3 lead with 1-3 weeks of testing before considering a permanent implant. Given the potential risk of bacterial contamination during testing and high success rates published by some experts, we compared the costs of traditional 2-stage against single-stage SNM placement for OAB. METHODS: We performed a cost minimization analysis using published data on 2-stage SNM success rates, SNM infection rates, and direct reimbursements from Medicare for 2017. We compared the costs associated with a 2-stage vs single-stage approach. We performed sensitivity analyses of the primary variables listed above to assess where threshold values occurred and used separate models for freestanding ambulatory surgery centers (ASC) and outpatient hospital departments (OHD). RESULTS: Based on published literature, our base case assumed a 69% SNM success rate, a 5% 2-stage approach infection rate, a 1.7% single-stage approach infection rate, and removal of 50% of non-working single-stage SNMs. In both ASC ($17 613 vs $18 194) and OHD ($19 832 vs $21 181) settings, single-stage SNM placement was less costly than 2-stage placement. The minimum SNM success rates to achieve savings with a single-stage approach occur at 65.4% and 61.3% for ASC and OHD, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Using Medicare reimbursement, single-stage SNM placement is likely to be less costly than 2-stage placement for most practitioners. The savings are tied to SNM success rates and reimbursement rates, with reduced costs up to $5014 per case in centers of excellence (≥ 90% success).

Financial impact of ultrasound-guided lumbar plexus and sciatic nerve blocks with electrostimulation for tibial plateau leveling osteotomy surgery in dogs.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the anesthesia cost from ultrasound-guided lumbar plexus and sciatic nerve blocks confirmed with electrostimulation for unilateral tibial plateau leveling osteotomy (TPLO) surgery in dogs. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, blinded clinical trial. ANIMALS: A group of 20 dogs weighing 33.9 ± 6.0 kg (mean ± standard deviation). METHODS: All dogs were administered hydromorphone and atropine, propofol for induction of anesthesia and isoflurane for maintenance. Hydromorphone and carprofen were administered for recovery. The dogs were randomly assigned to one of two groups, lumbar plexus and sciatic nerve blocks with ropivacaine [regional anesthesia (RA)] or sham blocks with saline [control (CON)]. Fentanyl was administered for rescue analgesia intraoperatively and postoperatively. The cost to manage anesthesia was divided into fixed and variable costs using the micro-costing method. The variable costs were compared using Student's t test or Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: The fixed anesthesia costs were equal between groups at US$354.00 per case. The variable anesthesia cost range was US$27.90-100.10 for RA and US$21.00-180.50 for CON. Overall, cost per dog in CON was from -US$6.9 to US$80.4 compared with RA. For 160 TPLO cases per year, hospital cost when RA is performed decreased the cost by $12,864 per year up to increased cost by $1104 per year, depending on the requirements for systemic drugs and incidence/severity of anesthesia complications. The estimated fee charge per case for service necessary to reimburse the cost of a new ultrasound (US$25,000.00) and nerve locator (US$925.00) over their life span of 6 and 10 years, respectively, is US$26.62. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Ultrasound-guided lumbar plexus and sciatic nerve blocks with electrostimulation confirmation can increase the anesthesia cost through use of specific equipment. However, in most cases, the anesthesia cost decreased as a result of decreased costs for pain management and treatment of complications.

The clinical- and cost-effectiveness of functional electrical stimulation and ankle-foot orthoses for foot drop in Multiple Sclerosis: a multicentre randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of ankle-foot orthoses (AFOs) and functional electrical stimulation (FES) over 12 months in people with Multiple Sclerosis with foot drop. DESIGN: Multicentre, powered, non-blinded, randomized trial. SETTING: Seven Multiple Sclerosis outpatient centres across Scotland. SUBJECTS: Eighty-five treatment-naïve people with Multiple Sclerosis with persistent (>three months) foot drop. INTERVENTIONS: Participants randomized to receive a custom-made, AFO (n = 43) or FES device (n = 42). OUTCOME MEASURES: Assessed at 0, 3, 6 and 12 months; 5-minute self-selected walk test (primary), Timed 25 Foot Walk, oxygen cost of walking, Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29, Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale-12, Modified Fatigue Impact Scale, Euroqol five-dimension five-level questionnaire, Activities-specific Balance and Confidence Scale, Psychological Impact of Assistive Devices Score, and equipment and National Health Service staff time costs of interventions. RESULTS: Groups were similar for age (AFO, 51.4 (11.2); FES, 50.4(10.4) years) and baseline walking speed (AFO, 0.62 (0.21); FES 0.73 (0.27) m/s). In all, 38% dropped out by 12 months (AFO, n = 21; FES, n = 11). Both groups walked faster at 12 months with device (P < 0.001; AFO, 0.73 (0.24); FES, 0.79 (0.24) m/s) but no difference between groups. Significantly higher Psychological Impact of Assistive Devices Scores were found for FES for Competence (P = 0.016; AFO, 0.85(1.05); FES, 1.53(1.05)), Adaptability (P = 0.001; AFO, 0.38(0.97); FES 1.53 (0.98)) and Self-Esteem (P = 0.006; AFO, 0.45 (0.67); FES 1 (0.68)). Effects were comparable for other measures. FES may offer value for money alternative to usual care. CONCLUSION: AFOs and FES have comparable effects on walking performance and patient-reported outcomes; however, high drop-outs introduces uncertainty.

A cohort study of functional electrical stimulation in people with multiple sclerosis demonstrating improvements in quality of life and cost-effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the impact on health-related quality of life of functional electrical stimulation used to improve walking in people with multiple sclerosis and to explore cost-effectiveness. DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of patient records was conducted. SETTING: This study used outpatient therapy service as the study setting. SUBJECTS: Data from 82 consecutive patients with multiple sclerosis attending for set up with functional electrical stimulation were analysed. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were seen at baseline, three and six months for support in use of functional electrical stimulation, and data were collected at baseline and six months. MAIN MEASURES: The EQ-5D-5L and walking speed were collected at baseline and six months after using functional electrical stimulation. The Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Device Scale was collected at six months. EQ-5D-3L utilities were derived and cost-effectiveness analysis was completed utilizing a five-year time horizon and methodology published by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. RESULTS: Significant differences (P < 0.001) were seen in walking speed (baseline 0.670 m/s; with stimulation 0.768 m/s) and maintained over six months (0.772 m/s with stimulation). EQ-5D data significantly improved over six months (baseline 0.486, six months 0.596, P < 0.001) and meaningful mean scores were seen in all aspects of the Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Device Scale. However, there were no correlations between measures. In the cost utility analysis, compared to standard care, functional electrical stimulation was more expensive and more effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £6137. CONCLUSION: Functional electrical stimulation is a cost-effective treatment to improve walking speed and health-related quality of life in people with multiple sclerosis.

Application of Internet+-based Tsinghua PINS Remote Tech to improve sacral neuromodulation programming procedure.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the feasibility and safety of the Tsinghua PINS Remote Tech to facilitate sacral neuromodulation programming procedure. METHOD: For 22 patients who had previously participated in the phase III clinical trial for treating overactive bladder with the Tsinghua PINS sacral neuromodulation system during several Hospital, PINS Remote Tech was applied to perform postoperative parameter adjustment in order to evaluate the safety and reliability of this new technique. Telephone surveys on Remote Tech-related questionnaires were also conducted. RESULTS: 17/22 patients underwent 26 parameter adjustments, average adjustment frequency was 1.53 times per person; the average adjustment time was 23.4 ± 5.1 min (15-32 min). The total effective rate of the Remote control was 14/17 (82.3%). 7/17 (41.1%) patients' symptoms recurrence due to not knowing how to handle patient controller, these patients were instructed on how to use it correctly through Remote Tech even without reprogramming it. Other 10 patients received reprogramming. There was no discomfort during and after parameter adjustment. The questionnaire survey showed that the remote technology saved patients' time and lowered financial costs, significantly improved patient satisfaction. All patients expressed their willingness to recommend it to other patients. CONCLUSION: The PINS Remote Tech can significantly reduce the financial cost and provide a remote reprogram control service that is as safe and reliable as outpatient program control.

Comparative effectiveness of one versus two-stage sacral neurostimulation device placement.

OBJECTIVE: Sacral neurostimulation (SNS) is an effective third-line treatment for overactive bladder. We sought to compare the cost of standard two-stage SNS device placement to that of a combined one-stage placement using a Markov chain model. METHODS: Costs were defined using Medicare outpatient reimbursement rates. The model was developed as follows: With the two-stage approach, patients underwent initial lead placement with fluoroscopy and those who converted to stage two underwent permanent generator placement week later. Patients who did not convert underwent lead removal. Patients undergoing a one-stage procedure had initial lead and generator placement at the same time. Patients with success underwent no further procedure. Patients without success could opt for generator and lead removal. Cost effectiveness of one versus two-stage placement depended on successful conversion rate. RESULTS: Reimbursement included physician, anesthesia, facility and device fees. In a two-stage procedure, initial cost of lead placement was $6170. With successful conversion, cost of a second procedure with permanent lead and generator placement was $18,474. Patients who failed test phase underwent lead removal for a cost of $2879. In a one-stage procedure approach, initial cost of permanent lead and generator placement was $18,474. Patients with a successful outcome had no additional costs. Patients with an unsuccessful outcome could have the lead and generator removal for a cost of $5758. If the conversion rate from testing phase to permanent placement was greater than 71%, a one-stage approach proved to be cost effective. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying patients with favorable risk factors for success may predict those patients who warrant a one-stage approach.

Cost-effectiveness of a cardiac contractility modulation device in heart failure with normal QRS duration.

AIMS: The objective of this paper is to assess whether cardiac contractility modulation (via the Optimizer System) plus standard of care (SoC) is a cost-effective treatment for people with heart failure [New York Heart Association (NYHA) III, left ventricular ejection fraction of 25-45%, and narrow QRS] compared against SoC alone from the perspective of the English National Health Service. METHODS AND RESULTS: We developed a regression equation-based cost-effectiveness model, using individual patient data from three randomized control trials (FIX-HF-5 Phases 1 and 2, and FIX-HF-5C) to populate the majority of parameters. A series of regression equations predicted NYHA class over time, mortality, all-cause hospitalization rates, and health-related quality of life. We conducted the analysis in line with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence reference case, modelling costs from an English National Health Service perspective, and considering outcomes in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over a patient lifetime perspective. Our base case analysis produced an incremental cost per additional QALY of GBP22 988 (€25 750) when comparing Optimizer + SoC to SoC alone. This result was not sensitive to parameter uncertainty but was sensitive to the time horizon over which costs and QALYs were captured and the duration over which a survival benefit with Optimizer + SoC can be assumed to apply. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac contractility modulation is likely to be cost-effective in people with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, NYHA III, and narrow QRS, provided that the treatment benefit can be maintained beyond the duration of the existing clinical trial follow-up. This analysis supports the current recommendations of the European Society of Cardiology that this therapy may be considered for such patients.

Cost-effectiveness of overactive bladder treatments: from the US payer perspective.

AIM: To assess the cost-effectiveness of onabotulinumtoxinA (onabotA), implantable sacral nerve stimulation devices, percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation, anticholinergic medications and mirabegron compared with best supportive care (BSC) for management of refractory overactive bladder (OAB). METHODS: A Markov model was developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of treatment options with BSC over a 10-year time horizon. Resource utilization, discontinuation rates and costs were derived from unpublished and published sources. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were reported. RESULTS: Treatment with onabotA 100U produced the largest gain in QALYs (7.179) and lowest estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ($32,680/QALY) of all assessed treatments compared with BSC. CONCLUSION: Compared with BSC, onabotA 100U was the most cost-effective treatment option for patients with refractory OAB.