Recurrence-Free Survival in Patients With Surgically Resected Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Standard treatment for early-stage or locoregionally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) includes surgical resection. Recurrence after surgery is commonly reported, but a summary estimate for postsurgical recurrence-free survival (RFS) in patients with NSCLC is lacking. RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the RFS after surgery in patients with stage I-III NSCLC at different time points, and what factors are associated with RFS? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases between January 2011 and June 2021. The primary outcome was RFS at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years postresection. Single-arm, random-effects meta-analyses were done to calculate effect estimates and 95% CIs. Analyses were stratified by stage/substage as per the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, and RFS was estimated (1) after pooling studies, using seventh or eighth edition staging criteria; and (2) among studies using only the eighth edition. Meta-regressions were performed to assess associations between RFS and patient demographic/clinical characteristics of interest. RESULTS: Data from 471 studies comprising 1,060 surgical study arms were extracted. RFS estimates from 60,695 patients staged with the seventh or eighth edition were analyzed. RFS ranged from 96% at 1 year postresection to 82% at 5 years for stage I, and from 68% at 1 year to 34% at 5 years for stage III. Estimates for patients staged using only eighth edition criteria were slightly higher. Older age, higher percentage of male patients, advancing stage, larger tumor size, and geographic region (North America/Europe vs Asia) were significantly associated with worse RFS. INTERPRETATION: This study presents a comprehensive assessment of reported RFS from published clinical literature, offering estimates at multiple postsurgical time points and by geographic region. Findings can inform treatment decisions, clinical trial design, and future research to improve outcomes among patients with NSCLC.

Corneal Outcomes Following Cataract Surgery Using Ophthalmic Viscosurgical Devices Composed of Chondroitin Sulfate-Hyaluronic Acid: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs) are commonly used during cataract surgery to protect the corneal endothelium. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the clinical evidence of OVDs composed of chondroitin sulfate-hyaluronic acid (CS-HA) versus other OVDs in maintaining endothelial cell density (ECD) and corneal thickness (CT). Methods: MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from 2000 to 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs, N ≥ 20 per group) comparing an OVD containing CS-HA (ie, VISCOAT®, DuoVisc® or DisCoVisc®) to any other OVD were included. The identified comparators were limited to the OVDs found in the literature, which included those composed of HA-only or hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC). Outcomes of focus included changes in ECD (baseline to 3 months) and CT (baseline to 24 hours). Meta-analyses were performed using R software, to assess mean differences (MD) in ECD and CT change between CS-HA OVDs and HA-only or HPMC OVDs. Results: A total of 966 abstracts were screened, and data were extracted from 12 RCTs. Meta-analyses using a random-effects model revealed significantly lower percent (%) decrease in ECD for CS-HA OVDs compared to both HA-only (MD: -4.10%; 95% CI: -5.81 to -2.40; p < 0.0001; 9 studies) and HPMC (MD: -6.47%; 95% CI: -10.41 to -2.52; p = 0.001; 2 studies) products. Similarly, % CT increase was significantly lower with CS-HA than with HA-only OVDs (MD: -3.22%; 95% CI: -6.24% to -0.20%; p = 0.04; 4 studies). However, there were no significant differences when comparing % CT change between CS-HA and HPMC OVDs (MD: 2.65%; 95% CI: -0.43% to 0.95%; p = 0.4; 2 studies). Conclusion: CS-HA OVDs lead to less postoperative loss of endothelial cells and may better protect corneal endothelium during cataract surgery, relative to other OVDs. Future randomized studies may be needed to solidify these findings.

An umbrella review of the surgical performance of Harmonic ultrasonic devices and impact on patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND: For thirty years, the Harmonic scalpel has been used for precise dissection, sealing and transection. There are numerous meta-analyses on individual surgical procedures with Harmonic, but no overarching review covering all the areas. This umbrella review seeks to summarize the clinical results from the use of Harmonic across surgical fields and broadly quantify its effects on patient outcomes. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Databases were searched for meta-analyses (MAs) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing Harmonic devices to conventional techniques or advanced bipolar (ABP) devices. For each procedure type, the most comprehensive MAs were evaluated. RCTs not already analysed in a MA were also included. Operating time, length of stay, intraoperative blood loss, drainage volume, pain, and overall complications were evaluated, and the methodological quality and certainty of evidence were assessed. RESULTS: Twenty-four systematic literature reviews were identified on colectomy, hemorrhoidectomy, gastrectomy, mastectomy, flap harvesting, cholecystectomy, thyroidectomy, tonsillectomy, and neck dissection. There were also 83 RCTs included. In every MA evaluated, Harmonic devices were associated with either statistically significant or numerical improvements in every outcome compared with conventional techniques; most MAs reported a reduction in operating time of ≥ 25 min. Harmonic versus ABP device MAs in colectomy and thyroidectomy showed no significant differences in outcomes. CONCLUSION: Across surgical procedures, Harmonic devices demonstrated improved patient outcomes for operating time, length of stay, intraoperative bleeding, drainage volume, pain, and overall complications compared to conventional techniques. Additional studies are required to assess differences between Harmonic and ABP devices.

Hemodialysis Arteriovenous Access Cosmesis Scale (AVACS): A new measure for vascular access.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop a cosmesis scale to evaluate the cosmetic appearance of hemodialysis (HD) arteriovenous (AV) accesses from the perspective of the patient and clinician, which could be incorporated into clinical trials. STUDY DESIGN: Using a modified Delphi process, two AV access cosmesis scale (AVACS) components were developed in a four-round Delphi panel consisting of two surveys and two consensus meetings with two rounds of patient consultation. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The Delphi panel consisted of 15 voting members including five interventional or general nephrologists, five vascular surgeons, three interventional radiologists, and two vascular access nurse coordinators. Four patients experienced with vascular access were involved in patient question development. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: For a component to be included in the AVACS, it had to meet the prespecified panel consensus agreement of ⩾70%. RESULTS: The clinician component of the AVACS includes nine questions on the following AV access features: scarring, skin discoloration, aneurysm/pseudoaneurysms and megafistula appearance. The patient component includes six questions about future vascular access decisions, interference with work or leisure activities, clothing choices, self-consciousness or attractiveness, emotional impact, and overall appearance. LIMITATIONS: Delphi panel methods are subjective by design, but with expert clinical opinion are used to develop classification systems and outcome measures. The developed scale requires further validation testing but is available for clinical trial use. CONCLUSIONS: While safety and efficacy are the primary concerns when evaluating AV access for HD, cosmesis is an important component of the ESKD patient experience. The AVACS has been designed to assess this important domain; it can be used to facilitate patient care and education about vascular access choice and maintenance. AVACS can also be used to inform future research on developing new techniques for AV access creation and maintenance, particularly as relates to AV access cosmesis.

Final Long-Term Reporting from a Randomized Controlled IDE Trial for Lumbar Artificial Discs in Single-Level Degenerative Disc Disease: 7-Year Results.

BACKGROUND: This study compared 7-year safety and efficacy outcomes of activL and ProDisc-L lumbar total disc replacements in patients with symptomatic, single-level lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD). The objectives are to report 7-year outcomes of the trial, evaluate the outcomes for patients lost to follow-up, and determine whether early outcomes predict long-term outcomes. METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled investigational device exemption study. Eligible patients with symptomatic, single-level lumbar DDD had failed ≥6 months of nonsurgical management. Patients (N = 283) were randomized to receive activL (n = 218) or ProDisc-L (n = 65). At 7 years, data were available from 206 patients (activL, 160; ProDisc-L, 46). Logistic regression models were fit to predict 7-year outcomes for patients lost to follow-up after 2 years. RESULTS: At 7 years, the activL group was noninferior to the ProDisc-L group on the primary composite endpoint (P = .0369). Both groups showed significant reductions in back/leg pain severity and improvements in disability index and quality-of-life relative to baseline (P < .0001). In both groups, opioid use was significantly reduced at 7 years (0%) relative to baseline (P < .01), and the overall reoperation rates were low (4.6%). activL patients showed a significantly better range of motion (ROM) for flexion-extension rotation than ProDisc-L patients (P = .0334). A significantly higher proportion of activL patients did not report serious adverse events (activL, 62%; ProDisc-L, 43%; P = .011). Predictive modeling indicated that >70% of patients (depending on outcome) lost to follow-up after 2 years would show clinically significant improvement at 7 years if improvements were achieved at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: The benefits of activL and ProDisc-L are maintained after 7 years, with significant improvements from baseline observed in pain, function, and opioid use. activL is more effective at preserving ROM than ProDisc-L and has a more favorable safety profile. Improvements in other primary and secondary outcomes were similar between both disc designs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1.

Umbrella review of 42 systematic reviews with meta-analyses: the safety of proton pump inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used to treat and prevent acid-related disorders. Despite high efficacy, PPI safety has been increasingly scrutinised. However, no comprehensive review summarising investigations of various adverse events is available. AIMS: To perform an umbrella review to comprehensively assess associations between adverse events and PPI use. METHODS: In accordance with PRISMA, an umbrella review of systematic reviews with meta-analyses was conducted. PubMed and EMBASE were searched from 2015 to July 2019. AMSTAR 2 and GRADE were used to assess quality and certainty of evidence. Author-reported quality assessments were also reviewed. RESULTS: Forty-two systematic reviews with meta-analyses, supported predominantly by observational evidence, were included. The most comprehensive studies reported statistically significant associations with PPI use for several outcomes, including: fractures (eg, hip; RR = 1.20; 95% CI = 1.14-1.28; n = 2 103 800), kidney disease (eg, acute kidney injury; RR = 1.61; 95% CI = 1.16-2.22; n = 2 396 640), infections (eg, Clostridioides difficile; OR = 1.99; 95% CI = 1.73-2.30; n = 356 683), gastric cancer (OR = 2.50; 95% CI = 1.74-3.85; n = 943 070) and gastrointestinal events (eg, fundic gland polyps; OR = 2.46; 95% CI = 1.42-4.27; n = 40 218). No associations with non-gastric cancers, or neurological disease were concluded, with conflicting evidence for cardiovascular outcomes. Certainty based on GRADE was very low for most outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified several published associations between PPIs and adverse outcomes, however, further investigation is needed to understand their clinical significance and the likelihood of causal relationship. If higher quality evidence is generated substantiating the potential risks, it may be necessary for clinicians to consider alternative treatment strategies, especially when PPI efficacy is suboptimal.

Successful Implementation of Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery: A Real-World Economic Analysis.

PURPOSE: To calculate the minimum number of Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) procedures required per month to pay off the fixed investment cost over 5 years to achieve break-even. SETTING: A rural ophthalmology practice located in the mid-West United States. DESIGN: An economic analysis, based on real-world, retrospectively collected data over 12 months, from an ambulatory surgical care perspective. METHODS: FLACS was initiated in 2017 with the LenSx® laser (Alcon Vision LLC., Fort Worth, TX). The incremental cost of FLACS, cases needed to break-even, return on investment (ROI), patient education, and marketing efforts were assessed. The financial analysis considered cataract volume, conversion rates, fixed (eg, principal) and variable (eg, supplies) costs, and revenue in the first 12 months. RESULTS: The clinic performed 2717 cataract surgeries in the 12-month period, with 1304 (48%) of patients converting to FLACS. Of FLACS procedures, 613 (47%) selected an advanced-technology intraocular lens (AT-IOL; eg, toric or lifestyle IOL), and the remaining patients selected a monofocal IOL with laser astigmatism correction. FLACS increased AT-IOL use by 113 procedures (23%) compared to volumes in the year prior to FLACS. Overall, FLACS was predicted to be profitable, with only 13 cases required per month to break even in 5 years. If both facility and physician fees are considered revenue, only eight cases per month are required to break-even in 5 years. CONCLUSION: The practice experienced a greater-than-anticipated conversion to FLACS and increased selection of AT-IOLs, well above the break-even volume required, contributing to a rapid return on their investment.

Comparative Assessment of Ergonomic Experience with Heads-Up Display and Conventional Surgical Microscope in the Operating Room.

PURPOSE: Musculoskeletal pain issues are prevalent in ophthalmic surgeons and can impact surgeon well-being and productivity. Heads-up displays (HUD) can improve upon conventional microscopes by reducing ergonomic stress. This study compared ergonomic outcomes between HUD and a conventional optical microscope in the operating room, as reported by ophthalmic surgeons in the US. METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed to a sample of surgeons who had experience operating with HUD. The questionnaire captured surgeon-specific variables, the validated Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire, and custom questions to compare HUD and conventional microscope. A multivariable model was built to identify variables that were likely to predict improvement in pain-related issues. RESULTS: Analysis was conducted on 64 surgeons (37 posterior-segment, 25 anterior-segment, and two mixed) with a mean 14.9 years of practice and 2.3 years using HUD. Most surgeons agreed or strongly agreed that HUD reduced the severity (64%) and frequency (63%) of pain and discomfort, improved posture (73%), and improved overall comfort (77%). Of respondents who experienced headaches, or pain and discomfort during operation, 12 (44%) reported their headaches improved and 45 (82%) reported feeling less pain and discomfort since they started using HUD. The multivariable model indicated the odds of reporting an improvement in pain since introducing the HUD in the operating room were 5.12-times greater for those who used HUD in >50% of their cases (P=0.029). CONCLUSION: This study indicates that heads-up display may be an important tool for wellness in the operating room as it can benefit ophthalmic surgeons across several ergonomic measures.

Microwave ablation compared with radiofrequency ablation for treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma and liver metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Percutaneous ablation techniques, including microwave ablation (MWA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA), have become important minimally invasive treatment options for liver cancer. This systematic review compared MWA with RFA for treatment of liver cancer. METHODS: The systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted for randomized and observational studies published from 2006 onwards. A random-effects model was used for meta-analyses and local tumor progression (LTP), technique efficacy, overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), intrahepatic de novo lesions (IDL), extrahepatic metastases (EHM), length of stay (LOS), and complications were analyzed. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were also conducted. RESULTS: Of 1379 studies identified, 28 randomized and observational studies met inclusion criteria. The main analysis demonstrated that LTP was significantly reduced by 30% with MWA versus RFA (RR=0.70; P=0.02) (all studies) and by 45% with MWA versus RFA (RR=0.55; P=0.007) (randomized studies only). There were no significant differences between MWA and RFA for other efficacy and safety outcomes. Higher frequency (2450 MHz) and larger tumor size (≥2.5 cm) are amongst variables that may be associated with improved outcomes for MWA. Sensitivity analyses were generally congruent with the main results. CONCLUSION: MWA is at least as safe and effective as RFA for treating liver cancer and demonstrated significantly reduced LTP rates. Future studies should assess time and costs associated with these two treatment modalities.

Five-year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial for Lumbar Artificial Discs in Single-level Degenerative Disc Disease.

STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled, investigational device exemption (IDE) noninferiority trial. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the 5-year safety and effectiveness of the activL Artificial Disc with Control Total Disc Replacement (TDR) systems (ProDisc-L or Charité) in the treatment of patients with symptomatic single-level lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The activL Artificial Disc received Food and Drug Administration approval in 2015 based on 2-year follow-up data. METHODS: Eligible patients presented with symptomatic, single-level, lumbar DDD who failed ≥6 months of nonsurgical management. At entry, 324 patients were randomly allocated (2 : 1) to treatment with activL (n = 218) or Control (n = 106, including n = 65 ProDisc-L and n = 41 Charité) TDR. At 5-year follow up, a total of 261 patients (176 activL patients and 85 Control patients) were available for analysis. RESULTS: The primary composite endpoint at 5 years for activL patients was noninferior to Control TDR. Relative to baseline, reductions in back pain severity and improvements in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were maintained for both the activL and Control TDR groups through 5 years. The activL group showed significantly better range of motion for flexion-extension rotation, flexion-extension translation, and disc angle, compared with Control TDR. Freedom from a serious adverse event through 5 years was 64% in activL patients, 47% in Control patients (log-rank P = 0.0068). Freedom from index-level and adjacent-level reoperation was high for TDR patients, ranging between 94% and 99%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Long-term evidence supports lumbar total disc replacement as safe. The next-generation activL Artificial Disc is more effective at preserving range of motion than first-generation lumbar TDRs (ProDisc-L and Charité) and offers a higher safety profile. Other primary and secondary outcomes are similar between disc designs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.

Length of stay and hospitalization costs for patients undergoing lung surgery with Progel pleural air leak sealant.

AIM: Progel Pleural Air Leak Sealant (Progel) is currently the only sealant approved by the FDA for the treatment of air leaks during lung surgery. This study was performed to determine whether Progel use improves hospital length of stay (LOS) and hospitalization costs compared with other synthetic/fibrin sealants in patients undergoing lung surgery. METHODS: The US Premier hospital database was used to identify lung surgery discharges from January 1, 2010 to June 30, 2015. Eligible discharges were categorized as "Progel Sealant" or "other sealants" using hospital billing data. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to control for hospital and patient differences between study groups. Primary outcomes were hospital LOS and all-cause hospitalization costs. Clinical outcomes, hospital re-admissions, and sealant product use were also described. RESULTS: After PSM, a total of 2,670 discharges were included in each study group; baseline characteristics were balanced between groups. The hospital LOS (mean days ± standard deviation, median) was significantly shorter for the Progel group (9.9 ± 9.6, 7.0) compared with the other sealants group (11.3 ± 12.8, 8.0; p < .001). Patients receiving Progel incurred significantly lower all-cause hospitalization costs ($31,954 ± $29,696, $23,904) compared with patients receiving other sealants ($36,147 ± $42,888, $24,702; p < .001). LIMITATIONS: It is not possible to say that sealant type alone was responsible for the findings of this study, and analysis was restricted to the data available in the Premier database. CONCLUSIONS: Among hospital discharges for lung surgery, Progel use was associated with significantly shorter hospital LOS and lower hospitalization costs compared with other synthetic/fibrin sealants, without compromising clinical outcomes.

Prolonged operative duration is associated with complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to systematically synthesize the large volume of literature reporting on the association between operative duration and complications across various surgical specialties and procedure types. METHODS: An electronic search of PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from January 2005 to January 2015 was conducted. Sixty-six observational studies met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Pooled analyses showed that the likelihood of complications increased significantly with prolonged operative duration, approximately doubling with operative time thresholds exceeding 2 or more hours. Meta-analyses also demonstrated a 14% increase in the likelihood of complications for every 30 min of additional operating time. CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged operative time is associated with an increase in the risk of complications. Given the adverse consequences of complications, decreased operative times should be a universal goal for surgeons, hospitals, and policy-makers. Future study is recommended on the evaluation of interventions targeted to reducing operating time.

Performance of Harmonic devices in surgical oncology: an umbrella review of the evidence.

BACKGROUND: We performed an umbrella review of systematic reviews summarizing the evidence on the Harmonic scalpel (HS) compared with conventional techniques in surgical oncology (including lymph node dissection). METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception to end of March of 2017 for meta-analyses or systematic reviews of randomized trials comparing HS to conventional techniques in surgical oncology. We assessed the quality of included systematic reviews with AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews) and assessed the certainty in evidence for each pooled outcome using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). RESULTS: We identified ten systematic reviews on breast cancer (n = 3), gastric cancers (n = 3), oral, head, and neck cancers (n = 1), and colon cancers (n = 3). Most reviews received a higher rating using AMSTAR. For operative time, systematic reviews reported a reduction of 25 to 29 min for HS compared with conventional methods across oncology types, with the exception of breast cancer where little differences were observed (very low to moderate quality of evidence (GRADE)). For blood loss and drainage volume, the majority of reviews reported statistically significant reductions with HS, and reductions ranged from 42 to 141 mL, and from 42 to 292 mL, respectively (very low to moderate quality of evidence). Hospitalization days were reported to decrease with use of HS by 0.2 to 3.2 days; however, reductions were only statistically significant for half of the included reviews (low to moderate quality of evidence). Regarding perioperative complications, two of six reviews reported a significantly reduced risk with HS use (breast cancer surgery) (moderate to high quality evidence)). CONCLUSION: Across surgical oncology types, the majority of included systematic reviews showed a statistically significant or numerical improvement in surgical outcomes with use of the HS compared with conventional methods. Well-designed randomized studies with large sample sizes will help to provide more precise estimates and reduce the risk of heterogeneity.

Prolonged Operative Duration Increases Risk of Surgical Site Infections: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) across surgical procedures, specialties, and conditions is reported to vary from 0.1% to 50%. Operative duration is often cited as an independent and potentially modifiable risk factor for SSI. The objective of this systematic review was to provide an in-depth understanding of the relation between operating time and SSI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This review included 81 prospective and retrospective studies. Along with study design, likelihood of SSI, mean operative times, time thresholds, effect measures, confidence intervals, and p values were extracted. Three meta-analyses were conducted, whereby odds ratios were pooled by hourly operative time thresholds, increments of increasing operative time, and surgical specialty. RESULTS: Pooled analyses demonstrated that the association between extended operative time and SSI typically remained statistically significant, with close to twice the likelihood of SSI observed across various time thresholds. The likelihood of SSI increased with increasing time increments; for example, a 13%, 17%, and 37% increased likelihood for every 15 min, 30 min, and 60 min of surgery, respectively. On average, across various procedures, the mean operative time was approximately 30 min longer in patients with SSIs compared with those patients without. CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged operative time can increase the risk of SSI. Given the importance of SSIs on patient outcomes and health care economics, hospitals should focus efforts to reduce operative time.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of Harmonic technology compared with conventional techniques in mastectomy and breast-conserving surgery with lymphadenectomy for breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Mastectomy and breast-conserving surgery (BCS) are important treatment options for breast cancer patients. A previous meta-analysis demonstrated that the risk of certain complications can be reduced with the Harmonic technology compared with conventional methods in mastectomy. However, the meta-analysis did not include studies of BCS patients and focused on a subset of surgical complications. The objective of this study was to compare Harmonic technology and conventional techniques for a range of clinical outcomes and complications in both mastectomy and BCS patients, including axillary lymph node dissection. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed for randomized controlled trials comparing Harmonic technology and conventional methods in breast cancer surgery. Outcome measures included blood loss, drainage volume, total complications, seroma, necrosis, wound infections, ecchymosis, hematoma, hospital length of stay, and operating time. Risk of bias was analyzed for all studies. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models for mean differences of continuous variables and a fixed-effects model for risk ratios of dichotomous variables. RESULTS: Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria. Across surgery types, compared to conventional techniques, Harmonic technology reduced total complications by 52% (P=0.002), seroma by 46% (P<0.0001), necrosis by 49% (P=0.04), postoperative chest wall drainage by 46% (P=0.0005), blood loss by 38% (P=0.0005), and length of stay by 22% (P=0.007). Although benefits generally appeared greatest in mastectomy patients with lymph node dissection, Harmonic technology showed significant reductions in complications in the BCS study subgroup. CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis of both mastectomy and BCS procedures, the use of Harmonic technology reduced the risk of most complications by about half across breast cancer surgery patients. These benefits may be due to superior hemostatic capabilities of Harmonic technology and better dissection, particularly lymph node dissection. Reduction in complications and other resource outcomes may engender lower downstream health care costs.

Hospital costs associated with thyroidectomy performed with a Harmonic device compared to conventional techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Harmonic devices have become a world-wide standard for dissection and hemostasis in thyroidectomy. Numerous systematic reviews have reported superior operating times, blood loss, post-operative pain, length of stay, and overall safety outcomes. What has not been extensively evaluated in a robust manner is their economic impact. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the hospital costs associated with open thyroidectomy using Harmonic devices compared with conventional techniques for hemostasis. METHODS: A systematic review of Medline, Scopus, and CENTRAL was performed from January 1, 2000 to May 23, 2014 without language restrictions for randomized clinical trials comparing Harmonic surgical devices to conventional methods in thyroidectomy. The main outcome measure was total reported costs. Costs were pooled using the ratio of means and a random effects model. Sensitivity analyses assessed whether differences in patient and trial characteristics, healthcare setting, or choice of statistical model affected outcomes. RESULTS: Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. A total of 476 participants had procedures performed with Harmonic devices and 478 with conventional monopolar electrosurgery and clamp, cut and tie techniques. Compared with conventional techniques, Harmonic devices reduced total reported costs by 10% (p = 0.007), resulting in a $229 US dollars (USD) absolute reduction from mean baseline costs. Results remained relatively robust to additional sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that the Harmonic family of surgical devices is associated with a reduction in total reported costs in thyroidectomy compared with conventional techniques. A large portion of the overall savings derives from a reduction in operative costs.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of Harmonic Focus in thyroidectomy compared to conventional techniques.

INTRODUCTION: Several meta-analyses have been performed comparing the use of a variety of ultrasonic devices in thyroidectomy to conventional procedures. These studies have shown the superiority of ultrasonic devices for most outcomes studied including faster operative time and less blood loss, and equivalent or better safety for recurrent laryngeal nerve paresis and hypocalcemia. The current work is the first to examine a single ultrasonic device specifically designed for thyroid surgery, the Harmonic Focus, in order to confirm its efficacy and safety in thyroidectomy. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search without language restrictions was performed for randomized clinical trials comparing Harmonic Focus and conventional clamp, cut and tie in thyroidectomy. Outcome measures included operating time, blood loss, post-operative pain, length of hospital stay, hypocalcemia and recurrent laryngeal nerve paresis. Risk of bias was analyzed for all studies. Meta-analysis was performed using random effects models with the inverse-variance method for mean differences of continuous variables and the Mantel-Haenszel method for risk ratios of dichotomous variables. RESULTS: A total of 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. Harmonic Focus reduced operative time by 29 min, a 31 % decrease (p < 0.001), intra-operative blood loss by 45 ml (p < 0.001), post-operative pain (p < 0.001), length of hospital stay by 0.68 days (p = 0.005), drainage volume by 29 ml (p = 0.01), and occurrence of transient hypocalcemia by 40 % (p = 0.001). There were no significant differences between Harmonic Focus and conventional procedures in rate of persistent hypocalcemia, or rates of transient and persistent recurrent laryngeal nerve paresis. CONCLUSION: This is the first meta-analysis of Harmonic Focus in thyroid surgery. In agreement with meta-analyses previously performed on ultrasonic devices, use of the Harmonic Focus has been shown to be a more effective surgical procedure compared to conventional methods in thyroidectomy. The low occurrence of hypocalcemia and recurrent laryngeal nerve paresis confirms that Harmonic Focus can improve thyroidectomy efficiency without increasing the risk of complications.

Gastrectomy and D2 Lymphadenectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis Comparing the Harmonic Scalpel to Conventional Techniques.

The ultrasonic Harmonic scalpel has demonstrated clinical and surgical benefits in dissection and coagulation. To evaluate its use in gastrectomy, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing the Harmonic scalpel to conventional techniques in gastrectomy for patients with gastric cancer. International databases were searched without language restrictions for comparisons in open or laparoscopic gastrectomy and lymphadenectomy. The meta-analysis used a random-effects model for all outcomes; continuous variables were analyzed for mean differences and dichotomous variables were analyzed for risk ratios. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for study quality, type of conventional technique, and imputation of study results. Ten studies (N = 935) met the inclusion criteria. Compared with conventional hemostatic techniques, the Harmonic scalpel demonstrated significant reductions in operating time (-27.5 min; P < 0.001), intraoperative blood loss (-93.2 mL; P < 0.001), and drainage volume (-138.8 mL; P < 0.001). Results were numerically higher for conventional techniques for hospital length of stay, complication risk, and transfusions but did not reach statistical significance. Results remained robust to sensitivity analyses. This meta-analysis demonstrates the clear advantages of using the Harmonic scalpel compared to conventional techniques, with improvements demonstrated across several outcome measures for patients undergoing gastrectomy and lymphadenectomy.

How rebates, copayments, and administration costs affect the cost-effectiveness of osteoporosis therapies.

PURPOSE: Because of rising drug expenditures, cost considerations have become essential, necessitating the requirement for cost-effectiveness analyses for managed care organizations (MCOs). The study objective is to examine the impact of various drug-cost components, in addition to wholesale acquisition cost (WAC), on the cost-effectiveness of osteoporosis therapies. DESIGN: A Markov model of osteoporosis was used to exemplify different drug cost scenarios. METHODOLOGY: We examined the effect of varying rebates for oral bisphosphonates--risedronate and ibandronate--as well as considering the impact of varying copayments and administration costs for intravenous zoledronate. The population modeled was 1,000 American women, > or = 50 years with osteoporosis. Patients were followed for 1 year to reflect an annual budget review of formularies by MCOs. The cost of therapy was based on an adjusted WAC, and is referred to as net drug cost. The total annual cost incurred by an MCO for each drug regimen was calculated using the net drug cost and fracture cost. We estimated cost on a quality adjusted life year (QALY) basis. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: When considering different rebates, results for risedronate versus ibandronate vary from cost-savings (i.e., costs less and more effective) to approximately $70,000 per QALY. With no risedronate rebate, an ibandronate rebate of approximately 65% is required before cost per QALY surpasses $50,000. With rebates greater than 25% for risedronate, irrespective of ibandronate rebates, results become cost-saving. Results also showed the magnitude of cost savings to the MCO varied by as much as 65% when considering no administration cost and the highest coinsurance rate for zoledronate. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that cost-effectiveness varies considerably when factors in addition to the WAC are considered. This paper provides recommendations for pharmaceutical manufacturers and MCOs when developing and interpreting such analyses.