Accounting for repeat intervention costs in the economic comparison of laser interstitial thermal therapy and anterior temporal lobectomy for treatment of refractory temporal lobe epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: Laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) is an alternative to anterior temporal lobectomy (ATL) for the treatment of temporal lobe epilepsy that has been found by some to have a lower procedure cost but is generally regarded as less effective and sometimes results in a subsequent procedure. The goal of this study is to incorporate subsequent procedures into the cost and outcome comparison between ATL and LITT. METHODS: This single-center, retrospective cohort study includes 85 patients undergoing ATL or LITT for temporal lobe epilepsy during the period September 2015 to December 2022. Of the 40 patients undergoing LITT, 35 % (N = 14) underwent a subsequent ATL. An economic cost model is derived, and difference in means tests are used to compare the costs, outcomes, and other hospitalization measures. RESULTS: Our model predicts that whenever the percentage of LITT patients undergoing subsequent ATL (35% in our sample) exceeds the percentage by which the LITT procedure alone is less costly than ATL (7.2% using total patient charges), LITT will have higher average patient cost than ATL, and this is indeed the case in our sample. After accounting for subsequent surgeries, the average patient charge in the LITT sample ($103,700) was significantly higher than for the ATL sample ($88,548). A second statistical comparison derived from our model adjusts for the difference in effectiveness by calculating the cost per seizure-free patient outcome, which is $108,226 for ATL, $304,052 for LITT only, and $196,484 for LITT after accounting for the subsequent ATL surgeries. SIGNIFICANCE: After accounting for the costs of subsequent procedures, we found in our cohort that LITT is not only less effective but also results in higher average costs per patient than ATL as a first course of treatment. While cost and effectiveness rates will vary across centers, we also provide a model for calculating cost effectiveness based on individual center data.

High-Value Epilepsy Care in the United States: Predictors of Increased Costs and Complications from the National Inpatient Sample Database 2016-2019.

BACKGROUND: For patients with medically refractory epilepsy, newer minimally invasive techniques such as laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) have been developed in recent years. This study aims to characterize trends in the utilization of surgical resection versus LITT to treat medically refractory epilepsy, characterize complications, and understand the cost of this innovative technique to the public. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample database was queried from 2016 to 2019 for all patients admitted with a diagnosis of medically refractory epilepsy. Patient demographics, hospital length of stay, complications, and costs were tabulated for all patients who underwent LITT or surgical resection within these cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 6019 patients were included, 223 underwent LITT procedures, while 5796 underwent resection. Significant predictors of increased patient charges for both cohorts included diabetes (odds ratio: 1.7, confidence interval [CI]: 1.44-2.19), infection (odds ratio: 5.12, CI 2.73-9.58), and hemorrhage (odds ratio: 2.95, CI 2.04-4.12). Procedures performed at nonteaching hospitals had 1.54 greater odds (CI 1.02-2.33) of resulting in a complication compared to teaching hospitals. Insurance status did significantly differ (P = 0.001) between those receiving LITT (23.3% Medicare; 25.6% Medicaid; 44.4% private insurance; 6.7 Other) and those undergoing resection (35.3% Medicare; 22.5% Medicaid; 34.7% private Insurance; 7.5% other). When adjusting for patient demographics, LITT patients had shorter length of stay (2.3 vs. 8.9 days, P < 0.001), lower complication rate (1.9% vs. 3.1%, P = 0.385), and lower mean hospital ($139,412.79 vs. $233,120.99, P < 0.001) and patient ($55,394.34 vs. $37,756.66, P < 0.001) costs. CONCLUSIONS: The present study highlights LITT's advantages through its association with lower costs and shorter length of stay. The present study also highlights the associated predictors of LITT versus resection, such as that most LITT cases happen at academic centers for patients with private insurance. As the adoption of LITT continues, more data will become available to further understand these issues.

Costs Associated with Laser Interstitial Thermal Therapy Are Lower Than Anterior Temporal Lobectomy for Treatment of Temporal Lobe Epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: Laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) is a minimally invasive alternative to anterior temporal lobectomy (ATL) for treatment of temporal lobe epilepsy. It has gained popularity as familiarity with technique increases and outcomes are better characterized. There has been no direct cost comparison between the 2 techniques in literature to date. The current study directly compares hospital costs associated with LITT with those of ATL patients and analyzes the factors potentially responsible for those costs. METHODS: Patients who underwent ATL (27) and LITT (15) were retrospectively reviewed for total hospital costs along with demographic, surgical, and postoperative factors potentially affecting cost. T-tests were used to compare costs and independent linear regressions, and hierarchical regressions were used to examine predictors of cost for each procedure. RESULTS: Mean hospital costs of admission for single-trajectory LITT ($104,929.88) were significantly less than for ATL ($134,980.04) (P = 0.001). In addition, length of stay, anesthesia costs, operative room costs, and postoperative hospitalization costs were all significantly lower in LITT. CONCLUSIONS: Given the minimally invasive nature of LITT, it is associated with shorter length of stay and lower hospital costs than ATL in the first head-to-head comparison of procedural costs in literature to date. Long-term efficacy as it relates to these costs associated with LITT and ATL should be further investigated to better characterize the utility of LITT in temporal lobe epilepsy patients.

Medical Costs of and Changes in Glaucoma Treatment among Patients Newly Starting Glaucoma Care.

Purpose: To use a medical claim database to investigate medical costs and treatment patterns among patients newly starting glaucoma care.Subjects and methods: Subjects registered in the Japan Medical Database Center (JMDC) from January 2005 to March 2016 who were newly diagnosed with glaucoma, started glaucoma treatment, and had treatment records covering more than five years were included in the analysis. All direct medical costs were collected for a period of up to ten years. Factors affecting medical costs were analyzed. Changes in hypotensive eyedrops and choices related to glaucoma surgery were also analyzed.Results: Out of approximately 1.42 million subjects, 2,393 satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The average total medical cost incurred per patient over a period of ten years was US$9,030, including US$1,214 during the initial year. The proportion of the total cost represented by the cost of hypotensive eyedrops increased from 5.2% to 10.6% over the ten-year period. Medical costs were higher in patients younger than ten years old than in patients of all other age groups. The number of ocular hypotensive eyedrops increased from 0.9 to 1.5 over the ten-year period. Medical costs were higher for subjects with secondary glaucoma than for other subjects. Sixty-three patients underwent trabeculotomy or trabeculectomy, and trabeculectomy was the preferred choice in later years.Conclusions: The total direct medical cost associated with glaucoma was US$9,030 for the first ten years. Drug costs gradually increased with treatment duration and patient age and varied by glaucoma type.

[Cost analysis of GreenLight photoselective vaporization of the prostate versus standard transurethral resection of the prostate: Benefit of ambulatory care]. / Analyse des coûts de la photovaporisation prostatique au laser Greenlight versus résection transurétrale de la prostate : intérêt de la prise en charge ambulatoire.

PURPOSE: To compare the costs associated with GreenLight XPS 180W photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) for an outpatient versus standard transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) with a three nights hospitalization in a French private hospital. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective cost minimization analysis was performed between 2017 and 2019 in a French private hospital for the hospital stays associated with TURP and PVP procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). The peri-operative cost-benefit assessment of the two procedures was analyzed from the establishment's point of view according to the micro-costing method. RESULTS: 871 surgical treatment for BPH had been performed during the period of the study, including 743 photoselective laser vaporization (85%). The average length of stay of patients undergoing TURP was 3,7 days versus 0,9 days for PVP including 64,7% ambulatory. The cost-benefit was more of 500€ per patient in favor of ambulatory PVP compared with TURP in conventional three nights hospitalization for level 1 hospital stays. CONCLUSION: In this private hospital center, ambulatory PVP seemed more cost-effective than TURP with a three nights hospitalization for a severity level 1 patient. The financial profit for the establishment was mostly due to reduction of the main length of stay and ambulatory care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Recurrent Respiratory Papillomatosis Office versus Operating Room: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Recurrent respiratory papillomatosis can be treated in the office or operating room (OR). The choice of treatment is based on several factors, including patient and surgeon preference. However, there is little data to guide the decision-making. This study examines the available literature comparing operative treatment in-office versus OR. METHODS: A systematic review was performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guidelines. Of 2,864 articles identified, 78 were reviewed full-length and 18 were included. Outcomes of interest were recurrence and complication rates, number of procedures, time interval between procedures, and cost. RESULTS: Only one study compared outcomes of operative in-office to OR treatments. The weighted average complication rate for OR procedures was 0.02 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.00-0.32), n = 8, and for office procedures, 0.17 (95% CI 0.08-0.33), n = 6. The weighted average time interval between OR procedures was 10.59 months (5.83, 15.35) and for office procedures 5.40 months (3.26-7.54), n = 1. The weighted average cost of OR procedures was $10,105.22 ($5,622.51-14,587.83), n = 2 versus $2,081.00 ($1,987.64-$2,174.36), n = 1 for office procedures. CONCLUSION: Only one study compares office to OR treatment. The overall data indicate no differences aside from cost and imply that office procedures may be more cost-effective than OR procedures. However, the heterogeneous data limits any strong comparison of outcomes between office and OR-based treatment of laryngeal papillomas. More studies to compare the two treatment settings are warranted.

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.

Cost-effectiveness of stereotactic laser ablation (SLA) for brain tumors.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic laser ablation(SLA) or laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) has been increasingly adopted as a treatment for primary and metastatic brain cancers. Here, we examined the published economic assessments of SLA, and review the current state of knowledge. METHODS: The PubMed database was queried for articles investigating the cost-effectiveness of LITT. 3068 articles were screened. Two studies that met the inclusion criteria were included in this review. RESULTS: Cost-effectiveness analysis(CEA) favored SLA(n = 8) relative to craniotomy (n = 92) for brain metastases (Mean difference [MD]=-US$6522; 95% confidence interval (CI) -$11,911 to -$1133; p = 0.02). SLA (n = 19) was found to be cost equivalent to craniotomy (n = 248) (MD=-US$1669; 95%(CI) -$8192 to $4854, p = 0.62) for primary brain tumors in general. CEA favored SLA for a subset of primary brain cancers. SLA was found to be cost-effective for difficult to access high-grade gliomas(HGG). When compared to 'other' existing treatments, the cost per life-years gained (LYG) through SLA was ∼$29,340, a threshold below that set for new technology adaptation in the U.S. Factors contributing to these cost-effectiveness were: (1) SLA of HGGs was associated with three-months prolongation in survival; (2) SLA of brain metastasis was associated with (i) shorter average length of stay (SLA: 2.3 days; craniotomy: 4.7 days), (ii) decreased discharge to inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF), skilled nursing facility (SNF), or home healthcare (SLA: 14.8%; craniotomy: 52%), (iii) lowered 30-day readmission (SLA: 0%; craniotomy: 14.1%). CONCLUSION: There is limited data on the cost-effectiveness of SLA. In the available literature, SLA compared favorably to craniotomy in terms of cost-effectiveness as a treatment for primary and metastatic brain cancers.

Photobiomodulation in oral mucositis in patients with head and neck cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis followed by a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Oral mucositis (OM) is an oral toxicity caused by cancer treatment, found often in patients with head and neck cancer. Low-intensity laser therapy for OM has anti-inflammatory, analgesic, and tissue reparative properties. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this work is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the randomized clinical trials of OM laser therapy in patients undergoing treatment for head and neck cancers, followed by a cost-effectiveness analysis of the therapy. METHOD: The search terms, mucositis and phototherapy, laser therapy and mucositis, photobiomodulation and mucositis, and low-level laser therapy and mucositis, were used to search the databases of PubMed, Web of Science, and MEDLINE. Randomized clinical trials were divided into two groups: one treated with laser therapy and the other given a placebo. Only 13 studies were included in the systematic review, and 6 studies in the meta-analysis. RESULTS: The results of the systematic review and meta-analysis show that the laser therapy presented good results in clinical improvement and pain reduction, decreasing the patients' likelihood of developing OM, with degrees of debilitating lesions, to 64% (RR = 0.36 [95% CI = 0.29-0.44]). The cost-effectiveness analysis revealed an incremental cost of R$ 3687.53 for the laser group, with an incremental effectiveness of 132.2. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was 27.89, for the severe OM cases that were avoided. CONCLUSION: It was concluded, therefore, that photobiomodulation for OM in patients receiving head and neck cancer treatment was clinically effective and cost-effective.

The cost-effectiveness of transurethral resection of the prostate vs thulium laser transurethral vaporesection of the prostate in the UNBLOCS randomised controlled trial for benign prostatic obstruction.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of the current 'gold standard' operation of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) compared to the new laser technique of thulium laser transurethral vaporesection of the prostate (ThuVARP) in men with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) within the UK National Health Service (NHS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The trial was conducted across seven UK centres (four university teaching hospitals and three district general hospitals). A total of 410 men aged ≥18 years presenting with either bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) or urinary retention secondary to BPO, and suitable for surgery, were randomised (whilst under anaesthetic) 1:1 to receive the TURP or ThuVARP procedure. Resource use in relation to the operation, initial inpatient stay, and subsequent use of NHS services was collected for 12 months from randomisation (equivalent to primary effectiveness outcome) using hospital records and patient questionnaires. Resources were valued using UK reference costs. Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated from the EuroQoL five Dimensions five Levels (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire completed at baseline, 3- and 12-months. Total adjusted mean costs, QALYs and incremental Net Monetary Benefit statistics were calculated: cost-effectiveness acceptability curves and sensitivity analyses addressed uncertainty. RESULTS: The total adjusted mean secondary care cost over the 12 months in the TURP arm (£4244) was £9 (95% CI -£376, £359) lower than the ThuVARP arm (£4253). The ThuVARP operation took on average 21 min longer than TURP. The adjusted mean difference of QALYs (0.01 favouring TURP, 95% CI -0.01, 0.04) was similar between the arms. There is a 76% probability that TURP is the cost-effective option compared with ThuVARP at the £20 000 per QALY willingness to pay threshold used by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). CONCLUSION: One of the anticipated benefits of the laser surgery, reduced length of hospital stay with an associated reduction in cost, did not materialise within the study. The longer duration of the ThuVARP procedure is important to consider, both from a patient perspective in terms of increased time under anaesthetic, and from a service delivery perspective. TURP remains a highly cost-effective treatment for men with BPO.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of vaginal carbon dioxide laser therapy compared with standard medical therapies for genitourinary syndrome of menopause-associated dyspareunia.

BACKGROUND: Topical vaginal estrogen therapy is considered the gold standard treatment for genitourinary syndrome of menopause-associated dyspareunia, but early investigations of energy-based devices show promise for patients with contraindications or those who are refractory to vaginal estrogen cream therapy. Although evaluating safety, efficacy, and long-term outcomes for novel technologies is critically important when new technologies become available to treat unmet healthcare needs, evaluation of the costs of these new technologies compared with existing therapies is also critically important but often understudied. OBJECTIVE: We sought to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of 3 therapies for genitourinary syndrome of menopause, including vaginal estrogen therapy, oral ospemifene therapy, and vaginal CO2 laser therapy and determine if vaginal laser therapy is a cost-effective treatment strategy for dyspareunia associated with genitourinary syndrome of menopause. STUDY DESIGN: An institutional review board-exempt cost-effectiveness analysis was performed by constructing a decision tree using decision analysis software (TreeAge Pro; TreeAge Software, Inc, Williamstown, MA) using integrated empirical data from the published literature. Tornado plots and 1-way and 2-way sensitivity analyses were performed to assess how changes in the model's input parameters altered the overall outcome of the cost-effectiveness analysis model. RESULTS: All 3 treatment methods were found to be cost-effective below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000.00 per quality-adjusted life year for moderate dyspareunia. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for vaginal CO2 laser therapy was $16,372.01 and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for ospemifene therapy was $5711.14. Although all 3 treatment strategies were on the efficient frontier, vaginal CO2 laser therapy was the optimal treatment strategy with the highest effectiveness. In a 1-way sensitivity analysis of treatment adherence, vaginal CO2 laser therapy was no longer cost-effective when the adherence fell below 38.8%. Vaginal estrogen cream and ospemifene therapies remained cost-effective treatment strategies at all ranges of adherence. When varying the adherence to 100% for all strategies, oral ospemifene therapy was "dominated" by both vaginal CO2 laser therapy and vaginal estrogen cream therapy. In a 2-way sensitivity analysis of vaginal CO2 laser therapy adherence and vaginal CO2 laser therapy cost, vaginal CO2 laser therapy still remained the optimal treatment strategy at 200% of its current cost ($5554.00) when the adherence was >55%. When the cost fell to 20% of its current cost ($555.40), it was the optimal treatment strategy at all adherence values above 29%. CONCLUSION: This study showed that vaginal fractional CO2 laser therapy is a cost-effective treatment strategy for dyspareunia associated with GSM, as are both vaginal estrogen and oral ospemifene therapies. In our model, vaginal CO2 laser therapy is the optimal cost-effective treatment strategy, and insurance coverage should be considered for this treatment option if it is proven to be safe and effective in FDA trials.

Cutaneous laser surgery for secondary burn reconstruction: Cost benefit analysis.

Thermal disease presents a major burden to individual patient morbidity, healthcare cost as well as to over all economy. Burns also also represent a significant per-patient utlilisation of finite healthcare resources. Secondary complications in these patients, such as multiple drug resistant organisms, may have a devastating effect. Laser surgery has recently come of age as an optimal tool in the secondary reconstruction of burn injury, that is able to simultaneously address significant sheet scar tightness, hypertrophic, atrophic, and keloid complications, pruritus, microstomia, ectropion, skin graft honeycombing, and improve range of movement whilst reducing the risk of infection to <1%. Yet, cutaneous laser surgery is often underutilised due to the perceived concerns about the sustainability of a new service with relatively high startup cost. We present a dual methodology to explore this concern: an evidence-based background review of the last 5 years of current best evidence, and a 22-year cost-analysis comparison at an established, high volume UK Centre of reconstructive surgery. We report that fiscal viability for laser surgery services for secondary burn reconstruction is supported by: level 2 (one systematic review) level 4 evidence (2 studies) and level 5 evidence (expert reports). Evidence over 22 years from an established super-regional NHS laser centre shows that introduction of this service led to sustained and substantial cost saving, producing excellent surgical results at a fraction of the cost of traditional surgery. Analysis of the potential dollar-effect of these advantages to the general population supports state investment in expertise and capital equipment as a medium to long-term cost saving strategy, which may also aid re-integrating patients into the workforce making a meaningful contribution to the economy.

Femtosecond laser-assisted versus phacoemulsification cataract surgery (FEMCAT): a multicentre participant-masked randomised superiority and cost-effectiveness trial.

BACKGROUND: Cataract surgery is one of the most common operations in health care. Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) enables more precise ocular incisions and lens fragmentation than does phacoemulsification cataract surgery (PCS). We hypothesised that FLACS might improve outcomes in cataract surgery compared with PCS despite having higher costs. METHODS: We did a participant-masked randomised superiority clinical trial comparing FLACS and PCS in two parallel groups (permuted block randomisation stratified on centres via a centralised web-based application, allocation ratio 1:1, block size of 2 or 4 for unilateral cases and 2 or 6 for bilateral cases). Five French University Hospitals enrolled consecutive patients aged 22 years or older who were eligible for unilateral or bilateral cataract surgery. Participants, outcome assessors, and technicians carrying out examinations were masked to the surgical treatment allocation until the last follow-up visit and a sham laser procedure was set up for participants randomly assigned to the PCS arm. The primary clinical endpoint was the success rate of surgery, defined as a composite of four outcomes at a 3-month postoperative visit: absence of severe perioperative complication, a best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of 0·0 LogMAR (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) or better, an absolute refractive error of 0·75 dioptres or less, and unchanged postoperative corneal astigmatism power (≤0·5 dioptres) and axis (≤20°). The primary economic endpoint was the incremental cost per additional patient who had treatment success at 3 months. Primary outcomes were assessed in all randomly assigned patients who met all eligibility criteria (missing data considered as failure). We used mixed logistic regression models or mixed linear regression models for statistical comparisons, adjusted on centres and whether cataract surgery was bilateral or unilateral. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01982006. FINDINGS: Of the 907 patients (1476 eyes) randomly assigned between Oct 9, 2013, and Oct 30, 2015, 870 (704 eyes in FLACS group and 685 eyes in the PCS group) were analysed. We identified no significant difference in the success rate of surgery between the FLACS and PCS groups (FLACS: 41·1% [289 eyes]; PCS: 43·6% [299 eyes]); adjusted odds ratio 0·85, 95% CI 0·64-1·12, p=0·250). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €10 703 saved per additional patient who had treatment success with PCS compared with FLACS. We observed no severe adverse events during the femtosecond laser procedure, and most of the complications in the FLACS group related to the primary outcome measures occurred during the phacoemulsification phase or postoperatively. INTERPRETATION: Despite its advanced technology, femtosecond laser was not superior to phacoemulsification in cataract surgery and, with higher costs, did not provide an additional benefit over phacoemulsification for patients or health-care systems. FUNDING: French Ministry of Social Affairs and Health.

Electrosurgical and Laser Therapy Tools for the Treatment of Malignant Central Airway Obstructions.

Central airway obstruction (CAO) is associated with significant morbidity and increased mortality. Bronchoscopic electrosurgical and laser ablative tools have proven to be safe and effective instruments for the treatment of malignant CAO. Although therapeutic modalities such as electrocautery, argon plasma coagulation, and laser have been used for decades, additional tools including radiofrequency ablation catheters continue to be developed for the treatment of CAO. These modalities are considered safe in the hands of experienced operators, although serious complications can occur. This review describes various electrosurgical and laser therapy tools used for the treatment of malignant CAO along with the specific advantages and disadvantages of each device.

Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery: A review.

PURPOSE: Review scientific literature concerning femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery. METHODS: Following databases were searched: CENTRAL (Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register; Cochrane Library: Issue 2 of 12, June 2019), Ovid MEDLINE® without Revisions (1996 to June 2019), Ovid MEDLINE® (1946 to June 2019), Ovid MEDLINE® Daily Update June 2019, MEDLINE and MEDLINE Non-Indexed Items, Embase (1980-2019), Embase (1974 to June 2019), Ovid MEDLINE® and Epub Ahead of Print, in-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily (1946 to June 2019), Web of Science (all years), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials ( www.controlled-trials.com ), ClinicalTrials.gov ( www.clinicaltrial.gov ) and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform ( www.who.int/ictrp/search/en ). Search terms/keywords included 'Femtosecond laser' combined with 'cataract', 'cataract surgery'. RESULTS: Based on quality of their methodology and their originality, 121 articles were reviewed, including randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-controlled studies, case series, case reports and laboratory studies. Each step of the femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery procedure (corneal incisions, arcuate keratotomies, capsulotomy and lens fragmentation) has been discussed with relevance to published outcomes, as well as complication rates of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery, and what we can learn from the larger studies/meta-analyses and the economics of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery within different healthcare settings. CONCLUSION: Studies suggest that the current clinical outcomes of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery are not different to conventional phacoemulsification surgery and it is not cost effective when compared with conventional phacoemulsification surgery. In its current technological form, it is a useful surgical tool in specific complex cataract scenarios, but its usage has not been shown to translate into better clinical outcomes.

Five-Year Outcomes of a Randomized Trial of Treatments for Varicose Veins.

BACKGROUND: Endovenous laser ablation and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy are recommended alternatives to surgery for the treatment of primary varicose veins, but their long-term comparative effectiveness remains uncertain. METHODS: In a randomized, controlled trial involving 798 participants with primary varicose veins at 11 centers in the United Kingdom, we compared the outcomes of laser ablation, foam sclerotherapy, and surgery. Primary outcomes at 5 years were disease-specific quality of life and generic quality of life, as well as cost-effectiveness based on models of expected costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained that used data on participants' treatment costs and scores on the EuroQol EQ-5D questionnaire. RESULTS: Quality-of-life questionnaires were completed by 595 (75%) of the 798 trial participants. After adjustment for baseline scores and other covariates, scores on the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (on which scores range from 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating a better quality of life) were lower among patients who underwent laser ablation or surgery than among those who underwent foam sclerotherapy (effect size [adjusted differences between groups] for laser ablation vs. foam sclerotherapy, -2.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], -4.49 to -1.22; P<0.001; and for surgery vs. foam sclerotherapy, -2.60; 95% CI, -3.99 to -1.22; P<0.001). Generic quality-of-life measures did not differ among treatment groups. At a threshold willingness-to-pay ratio of £20,000 ($28,433 in U.S. dollars) per QALY, 77.2% of the cost-effectiveness model iterations favored laser ablation. In a two-way comparison between foam sclerotherapy and surgery, 54.5% of the model iterations favored surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial of treatments for varicose veins, disease-specific quality of life 5 years after treatment was better after laser ablation or surgery than after foam sclerotherapy. The majority of the probabilistic cost-effectiveness model iterations favored laser ablation at a willingness-to-pay ratio of £20,000 ($28,433) per QALY. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research; CLASS Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN51995477.).

Variations in Stapes Surgery Cost within a Multihospital Network.

OBJECTIVE: To identify costs and operative times for stapedotomy and evaluate factors influencing cost variation. STUDY DESIGN: Case series with cost analysis. SETTING: Multihospital network. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A multihospital network's standardized activity-based accounting system was used to determine costs and operative times of all patients undergoing stapedotomy from 2013 to 2017. Subjects with additional procedures were excluded. Correlations between variable factors and cost were calculated by Spearman correlation coefficients. Audiometric and cost data were compared with a Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: The study cohort included 176 stapedotomies performed by 23 surgeons at 10 hospitals. Mean ± SD patient age was 44.3 ± 17.4 years. Mean cut-to-close time was 61.1 ± 23.55 minutes. Mean total encounter cost was $3542.14 ± $1258.78 (US dollars). Significant factors correlating with increased total encounter cost were surgical supply cost (r = 0.74, P < .0001) and cut-to-close time (r = 0.66, P < .0001). Laser utilization ($563.37 ± $407.41) was the highest-cost surgical supply, with the carbon dioxide laser being significantly more costly than the potassium titanyl phosphate (KTP; $852.60 vs $230.55, P < .001). Additionally, the carbon dioxide laser was associated with a significantly higher mean total encounter cost than the KTP laser ($4645.43 vs $2903.00, P < .001) and cases where no laser was used ($4645.43 vs $2932.47, P < .001). There was no difference in mean total encounter cost between the KTP laser and cases of no laser use ($2903.00 vs $2932.47, P = .75). CONCLUSIONS: Significant cost variation exists in stapes surgery. Surgical supply cost, specifically laser use, may be associated with significantly increased costs. Reducing variation in costs while maintaining outcomes may improve health care value.

Assessing Cost-Effectiveness of New Technologies in Stone Management.

Diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up are all influential in determining the overall cost to the health care system for kidney stones. New innovations in the field of nephrolithiasis have been abundant, including disposable ureteroscopes, ultrasound-guided approaches to percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and advanced laser lithotripters. Identifying cost-effective treatment strategies encourages practitioners to be thoughtful about providing value-based high-quality care and remains on important principle in the treatment of urinary stone disease.

Cost Effectiveness of Treatments for Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Literature Review.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) affects approximately one-third of people diagnosed with diabetes, can be sight-threatening, and generates significant human and economic burden. Over the last 2 decades, newer therapies have emerged, offering significant clinical benefits, however at a cost. Given the scarcity of available budgets, the cost effectiveness of these newer treatments is of vital importance to policy makers. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, HEED and CRD databases to find and evaluate economic evaluations assessing the cost effectiveness of alterative DR treatments. Studies were assessed for their eligibility, findings and quality, and are presented in this systematic review. RESULTS: Of the 5254 studies retrieved from the literature search, 17 were included in this review. For patients with proliferative DR, when early pars plana vitrectomy was compared with pan-retinal laser photocoagulation, similar cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) was observed between the two. Treatment with either intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) or intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) falls within acceptable cost-effectiveness thresholds in the diabetic macular oedema (DMO) population; however, in the non-DMO population, the marginal benefit of IVR or IVB in relation to the marginal cost relative to laser does not justify their use. Among the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapies, IVB appears more attractive from an economic point of view due to its lower cost. For patients with DMO, studies indicate that a combination therapy of IVR or IVB with laser and, to a lesser degree, as monotherapy, are cost effective relative to laser monotherapy; IVR plus laser is cost effective relative to laser plus triamcinolone; and laser combined with triamcinolone injections is reportedly more cost effective over IVR for pseudophakic eyes only. Moreover, fluocinolone implants appear cost effective compared with sham implants, or when treating refractory DMO. IVR administered either pro re nata (PRN) or as 'treat and extend' dominated intravitreal aflibercept (IVA) in a few studies. On the other hand, IVR monotherapy or with laser (as well as IVA) does not compare favourably relative to IVB monotherapy or with laser. CONCLUSIONS: Interpretation of cost-effectiveness data should be treated with caution in this case; details of the therapeutic regimen, such as dosage and frequency, and clinical efficacy of the treatments should be considered in relation to policy-making decisions. Given the scarcity of resources, the ever-increasing significance of health technology assessment, and the substantial differences in the methodologies of the studies presented in this review, there is a pressing need for more advanced and standardised approaches to assessing the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of the emerging anti-VEGF pharmacotherapies for the treatment of DMO.