Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
ASAIO J ; 69(5): 475-482, 2023 05 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36724196

RESUMEN

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become the preferred treatment for severe aortic stenosis. Previous studies compare clinical outcomes of leading TAVR valves, but there is no evidence of cost-utility comparison, leaving a clinical information gap when selecting valves. Here we share a cost-utility analysis comparing the Sapien 3 (S3) (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) and CoreValve Evolut R (ER) (Medtronic, Dublin, IR) across five clinical endpoints. Utility scores from patient surveys and clinical outcomes from the literature were used to estimate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with successful procedure and postoperative complications for S3 and ER. A decision tree was constructed with rollback analysis to highlight the more cost-effective strategy. An incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) analysis was performed with a willingness to pay at $50,000. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to validate robustness of results and account for uncertainty. S3 was found to be more costly ($68,377 vs. $66,072), but more effective (1.87 vs . 1.66) compared with ER. An ICUR of 11,288.12 favored S3, making it the more cost-effective option with a moderate confidence of 73.68% in Monte Carlo analysis. Cost-utility analysis can be used to aid in healthcare economics decision-making when selecting between comparable technologies used for TAVR procedures.


Asunto(s)
Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica , Implantación de Prótesis de Válvulas Cardíacas , Prótesis Valvulares Cardíacas , Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter , Humanos , Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter/métodos , Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica/cirugía , Resultado del Tratamiento , Implantación de Prótesis de Válvulas Cardíacas/métodos , Válvula Aórtica/cirugía , Diseño de Prótesis
3.
Ann Surg Oncol ; 29(10): 6163-6188, 2022 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35876923

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: There have been conflicting studies reporting on survival advantages between breast-conserving surgery with radiotherapy (BCS) in comparison with mastectomy. Our aim was to compare the efficacy of BCS and mastectomy in terms of overall survival (OS) comparing all past published studies. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive review of literature through October 2021 in PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE. The studies included were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohorts that compare BCS versus mastectomy. We excluded studies that included male sex, stage 0, distant metastasis at diagnosis, bilateral synchronous cancer, neoadjuvant radiation/chemotherapy, and articles with incomplete data. We performed a meta-analysis following the random-effect model with the inverse variance method. RESULTS: From 18,997 publications, a total of 30 studies were included in the final analysis: 6 studies were randomized trials, and 24 were retrospective cohorts. A total of 1,802,128 patients with a follow-up ranging from 4 to 20 years were included, and 1,075,563 and 744,565 underwent BCS and mastectomy, respectively. Among the population, BCS is associated with improved OS compared with mastectomy [relative risk (RR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-0.74]. This effect was similar when analysis was performed in cohorts and multi-institutional databases (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.49-0.67). Furthermore, the benefit of BCS was stronger in patients who had less than 10 years of follow-up (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.46-0.64). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent BCS had better OS compared with mastectomy. Such results depicting survival advantage, especially using such a large sample of patients, may need to be included in the shared surgical decision making when discussing breast cancer treatment with patients.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Mastectomía Segmentaria , Neoplasias de la Mama/radioterapia , Neoplasias de la Mama/cirugía , Femenino , Humanos , Mastectomía/métodos , Mastectomía Segmentaria/métodos , Terapia Neoadyuvante , Estudios Retrospectivos
4.
ASAIO J ; 68(8): e134-e135, 2022 08 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35605255

RESUMEN

Here, we present our technique for thermoregulation of cardiac preservation solution with the SherpaPak device before heart transplantation. If it is above the ideal range (5-10°C) to avoid organ injury and ensure proper function, the cardiac preservation solution bag should be placed in ice water to bring down temperature until the ideal range is achieved. SherpaPak has limitation in immediately correcting initial temperatures outside of the normal range, so we believe this simple step should be included into standard SherpaPak procedure to ensure its effectiveness and to preserve the best organ function.


Asunto(s)
Trasplante de Corazón , Preservación de Órganos , Temperatura Corporal , Corazón/fisiología , Humanos , Preservación de Órganos/métodos , Temperatura , Donantes de Tejidos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA