Cost-Effectiveness of Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging Versus Second-Look Surgery in Treating Cholesteatoma: A Modeling Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether canal wall-up (CWU) tympanomastoidectomy with diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) is a cost-effective method of treating cholesteatoma compared with CWU with second-look surgery. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted using a Markov state transition model. The simulation model adhered to the Panel Recommendations on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine established by the US Public Health Service. One-way and Monte Carlo probability sensitivity analyses were conducted for validation. INTERVENTIONS: Tympanomastoidectomy with DW-MRI versus tympanomastoidectomy with second-look surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Effectiveness and health utility were measured using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were derived from Medicare reimbursement using the perspective of the payer. Probabilities for outcomes and complications were taken from existing literature. Cost-effectiveness was assessed using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS: With base case analysis, the total cost was $15,069 when treated with CWU and second-look surgery versus $13,126 when treated with CWU and DW-MRI. The second-look treatment pathway yielded 17.05 QALYs, whereas the DW-MRI pathway yielded 16.91 QALYs in terms of health benefit accrued across the lifetime of the patient. The cost-effectiveness incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $21,800/QALY. Using the conventional $50,000 willingness-to-pay threshold, second-look surgery was the more cost-effective approach 63.7% of the time by simulation. CONCLUSIONS: Both treatment pathways were found to be cost-effective, with second-look surgery incrementally cost-effective 63.7% of the time. Assumptions were validated by one-way and Monte Carlo probability sensitivity analysis. PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE GAP AND EDUCATIONAL NEED: There is ample variation in treatment pathways regarding usage of DW-MRI and second-look surgery for cholesteatoma. LEARNING OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of DW-MRI and second-look surgery approaches, accounting for health-related quality-of-life outcomes and costs for the duration of the patient lifetimes. DESIRED RESULT: To inform the discussion on the treatment for cholesteatoma given emergent noninvasive technologies.Level of Evidence: Level III.Indicate IRB or IACUC: Exempt.

Cost-effectiveness of Canal Wall-Up vs Canal Wall-Down Mastoidectomy: A Modeling Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the relative lifetime costs, benefits, and cost-effectiveness between the 2 approaches, canal wall-up (CWU) and canal wall-down (CWD) tympanomastoidectomy, used in the treatment of cholesteatomas. STUDY DESIGN: Markov state transition model. SETTING: Tertiary academic health system. METHODS: A Markov state transition model was used to simulate outcomes across the patient lifetime. Outcome and complication probabilities were obtained from the existing literature. Costs were calculated from the payer perspective, with procedure, hospital, clinic, and physician cost derived from Medicare reimbursement. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used to represent effectiveness and utility. One-way and probability sensitivity analyses (PSAs) were conducted. RESULTS: The base case analysis, assuming a 40-year-old patient, yielded a lifetime cost of $14,214 for a patient treated with the CWU approach assuming second-look surgery and $22,290 with a CWD approach. CWU and CWD generated a benefit of 17.11 and 17.30 QALYs, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for CWU was $43,237 per QALY. The Monte Carlo PSA validated the base case scenario. Using a standard $50,000 willingness-to-pay threshold, CWD was the more cost-effective approach and was selected 54.8% of the time by the simulation. CONCLUSION: Both CWU and CWD were found to be cost-effective, with CWD being cost-effective 54.8% of the time at a WTP threshold of $50,000. The assumptions used in the analysis were validated by the results of 1-way and PSA.

The Price of Otologic Procedures: Variation in Markup by Surgical Procedure and Geography in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize and analyze variation in price markup of seven common otologic surgeries by procedure and geographic region. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Analysis of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services database of 2017 Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Public File. SETTING: Inpatient and outpatient centers delivering Medicare-reimbursed services. PATIENTS: Full sample of patients undergoing procedures with Medicare fee-for-service final action claims during 2017. INTERVENTIONS: Seven procedures (myringotomy, tympanoplasty, mastoidectomy, tympanomastoidectomy stapedotomy/stapedectomy, cochlear implant, bone-anchored hearing aid). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Markup ratio (MUR) is defined as the ratio of total charges to Medicare-allowable-costs; Variation in MUR was measured using coefficient of variation (CoV). RESULTS: Among all providers, the median MUR was 2.4 (interquartile range: 1.9-3.1). MUR varied significantly by procedure, from 2.3 for myringotomy to 8.7 for mastoidectomy (p < 0.01). MUR also varied significantly within procedure, with the least variation found in myringotomy (CoV = 0.46), and the greatest in cochlear implants (CoV = 0.92). Using the national average as baseline, MUR varied 71% between states, ranging from 1.75 to 6.24. Within the same state, significant variation was also noted, varying by 4% (CoV = 0.04) in Montana compared with 138% (CoV = 1.38) in Pennsylvania. MUR was not significantly correlated with patient comorbidity or Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services risk scores. CONCLUSIONS: There was significant variation in the price of otologic surgery across geographic regions and procedures. The MUR for otology is lower or comparable to that reported in other surgical fields.

The utility of augmented reality in lateral skull base surgery: A preliminary report.

OBJECTIVE: To discuss the utility of augmented reality in lateral skull base surgery. PATIENTS: Those undergoing lateral skull base surgery at our institution. INTERVENTION(S): Cerebellopontine angle tumor resection using an augmented reality interface. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Ease of use, utility of, and future directions of augmented reality in lateral skull base surgery. RESULTS: Anecdotally we have found an augmented reality interface helpful in simulating cerebellopontine angle tumor resection as well as assisting in planning the incision and craniotomy. CONCLUSIONS: Augmented reality has the potential to be a useful adjunct in lateral skull base surgery, but more study is needed with large series.

Lymph Node Ratio in HPV-Associated Oropharyngeal Cancer: Identification of a Prognostic Threshold.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the utility of lymph node ratio (LNR) as a prognostic factor for survival and recurrence in surgically treated patients with human papillomavirus (HPV)-related oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study of a tertiary healthcare system in a major metropolitan area, we reviewed 169 consecutive patients with HPV-related OPSCC treated using transoral robotic surgery. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis with stratified models were used to compare LNR with other traditional clinicopathologic risk factors forrecurrence and survival. An LNR cutoff was found using the minimal P approach. RESULTS: Multivariable Cox regression models showed that each additional percentage increase in LNR corresponded to an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 1.04 (confidence interval [CI] 1.02-1.07). LNR was more significant when adjusted for adequate lymph node yield of ≥ 18 nodes (HR 5.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.38-18.47). The minimal P generated cutoff point at LNR ≥ 17% demonstrated a HR 4.34 (95% CI 1.24-15.2) for disease-free survival. CONCLUSION: For HPV-related OPSCC, continuous LNR and an LNR threshold of 17% could be helpful in identifying recurrent disease in addition to measures such as lymph node number alone. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Trends and sociodemographic disparities in sugary drink consumption among adults in New York City, 2009-2017.

Despite efforts to decrease sugary drink consumption, sugary drinks remain the largest single source of added sugars in diets in the United States. This study aimed to examine trends in sugary drink consumption among adults in New York City (NYC) over the past decade by key sociodemographic factors. We used data from the 2009-2017 NYC Community Health Survey to examine trends in sugary drink consumption overall, and across different age, gender, and racial/ethnic subgroups. We conducted a test of trend to examine the significance of change in mean sugary drink consumption over time. We also conducted multiple zero-inflated negative binomial regression to identify the association between different sociodemographic and neighborhood factors and sugary drink consumption. Sugary drink consumption decreased from 2009 to 2014 from 0.97 to 0.69 servings per day (p < 0.001), but then plateaued from 2014 to 2017 (p = 0.01). Although decreases were observed across all age, gender and racial/ethnic subgroups, the largest decreases over this time period were observed among 18-24 year old (1.75 to 1.22 servings per day, p < 0.001); men (1.12 to 0.86 servings per day, p < 0.001); Blacks (1.45 to 1.14 servings per day, p < 0.001); and Hispanics (1.26 to 0.86 servings per day, p < 0.001). Despite these decreases, actual mean consumption remains highest in these same sociodemographic subgroups. Although overall sugary drink consumption has been declining, the decline has slowed in more recent years. Further, certain age, gender and racial/ethnic groups still consume disproportionately more sugary drinks than others. More research is needed to understand and address the root causes of disparities in sugary drink consumption.

Achieving Value in Population Health Big Data.

Several population health big data projects have been initiated in the USA recently. These include the County Health Rankings & Roadmaps (CHR) initiated in 2010, the 500 Cities Project initiated in 2016, and the City Health Dashboard project initiated in 2017. Such projects provide data on a range of factors that determine health-such as socioeconomic factors, behavioral factors, health care access, and environmental factors-either at the county or city level. They provided state-of-the-art data visualization and interaction tools so that clinicians, public health practitioners, and policymakers can easily understand population health data at the local level. However, these recent initiatives were all built from data collected using long-standing and extant public health surveillance systems from organizations such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the U.S. Census Bureau. This resulted in a large extent of similarity among different datasets and a potential waste of resources. This perspective article aims to elaborate on the diminishing returns of creating more population health datasets and propose potential ways to integrate with clinical care and research, driving insights bidirectionally, and utilizing advanced analytical tools to improve value in population health big data.