Health Care Costs and Cost-effectiveness in Laryngotracheal Stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: Laryngotracheal stenosis (LTS) is resource-intensive disease. The cost-effectiveness of LTS treatments has not been adequately explored. We aimed to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing open reconstruction (cricotracheal/tracheal resection [CTR/TR]) with endoscopic dilation in the treatment of LTS. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: Tertiary referral center (2013-2017). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Thirty-four LTS patients were recruited. Annual costs were derived from the Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins University. Cost-effectiveness analysis compared CTR/TR versus endoscopic dilation at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) over 5- and 10-year time horizons. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated with deterministic analysis and tested for sensitivity with univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Mean LTS costs were $4080.09 (SE, $569.29) annually for related health care visits. The major risk factor for increased cost was etiology of stenosis. As compared with idiopathic patients, patients with intubation-related stenosis had significantly higher annual costs ($5286.56 vs $2873.62, P = .03). The cost of CTR/TR was $8583.91 (SE, $2263.22). Over a 5-year time horizon, CTR/TR gained $896 per QALY over serial dilations and was cost-effective. Over a 10-year time horizon, CTR/TR dominated dilations with a lower cost and higher QALY. CONCLUSION: The cost of treatment for LTS is significant. Patients with intubation-related stenosis have significantly higher annual costs than do idiopathic patients. CTR/TR contributes significantly to cost in LTS but is cost-effective versus endoscopic dilations for appropriately selected patients over a 5- and 10-year horizon.

Whose patient is it? The path to multidisciplinary management of achalasia.

In the past decade, the introduction of high-resolution manometry and the classification of achalasia into subtypes has made possible to accurately diagnose the disease and predict the response to treatment for its different subtypes. However, even to date, in an era of exponential medical progress and increased insight in disease mechanisms, treatment of patients with achalasia is still rather simplistic and mostly confined to mechanical disruption of the lower esophageal sphincter by different means. In addition, there is partial consensus on what is the best form of available treatments for patients with achalasia. Herein, we provide a comprehensive outlook to a general approach to the patient with suspected achalasia by: 1) defining the modern evaluation process; 2) describing the diagnostic value of high-resolution manometry and the Chicago Classification in predicting treatment outcomes and 3) discussing the available treatment options, considering the patient conditions, alternatives available to both the surgeon and the gastroenterologist, and the burden to the health care system. It is our hope that such discussion will contribute to value-based management of achalasia through promoting a leaner clinical flow of patients at all points of care.

The role of industry influence in sinus balloon dilation: Trends over time.

OBJECTIVE: Balloon dilation (BD) is a controversial alternative to conventional sinus surgery. The role of industry on practice patterns remains unknown. The aim of this study was to determine whether industry payments from BD manufacturers influence practice patterns for otolaryngologists and evaluate how these payments change over time. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment (PUP) Data and Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payments (OP) general payment datasets. A total of 294 otolaryngologists identified in the PUP dataset who performed BD procedures from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2015, were cross-referenced in the OP dataset from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2016, for BD manufacturer payments. Payments to surgeons performing BD stratified by amount, type, and number of procedures performed were primary outcome measures. RESULTS: Of the 294 otolaryngologists reporting BD procedures, 223 (76%) received payments from a company that manufactures BD devices. Receipt of $2,500 in BD payments was associated with performance of one additional BD procedure, and consulting fees were most positively associated with performing additional BD procedures (P = 0.006). The providers receiving the most in BD payments were more likely to continue to receive the most in payments, regardless of number of BD procedures performed. Performing more BD procedures did not correlate with decrease in other sinus procedures. CONCLUSION: Payments to otolaryngologists from manufacturers of sinus BD devices are associated with the performance of an increased number of such procedures. Surgeons should consider the impact of interactions with industry when evaluating patients for BD procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. Laryngoscope, 128:1540-1545, 2018.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of the up-front use of balloon catheter dilation in the treatment of pediatric chronic rhinosinusitis.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of pediatric sinusitis continues to be a controversial topic. It has been recommended to treat pediatric chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) with adenoidectomy before proceeding to more invasive techniques. There are concerns regarding side effects of endoscopic sinus surgery in pediatric patients. With the advent of balloon catheter dilation (BCD) as a minimally invasive technique, some authors are recommending up front adenoidectomy with BCD in order to maximize disease resolution while minimizing risk. PURPOSE: Our study examines the cost effectiveness of adenoidectomy alone versus adenoidectomy and upfront BCD for the management of pediatric CRS. METHODS: A decision tree analysis was created to determine the cost effectiveness of treating a pediatric patient who has failed medical management, using adenoidectomy versus adenoidectomy with up-front BCD. Three separate decision trees were made. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated for each scenario and a sensitivity analysis was done to determine how different values impacted our results. RESULTS: Adenoidectomy as the sole first procedure was found to be more cost effective in all three decision trees. For tree 1, the adenoidectomy plus BCD arm was 0.03% more effective in the end, but with an $81, 431 incremental cost. CONCLUSIONS: Costs in addition to outcomes must be considered when comparing treatment modalities in our current health care environment. This study found that adenoidectomy as a first intervention before proceeding to more advanced techniques is nearly as effective and is a much more cost-effective algorithm for the treatment of pediatric CRS. However, the physician must advocate the best treatment for his or her own patients.

Office-based esophageal dilation in head and neck cancer: Safety, feasibility, and cost analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To review experience, safety, and cost of office-based esophageal dilation in patients with history of head and neck cancer (HNCA). METHODS: The medical records of patients undergoing esophageal dilation in the office were retrospectively reviewed between August 2015 and May 2017. Patients were given nasal topical anesthesia. Next, a transnasal esophagoscopy (TNE) was performed. If the patient tolerated TNE, we proceeded with esophageal dilation using Seldinger technique with the CRE™ Boston Scientific (Boston Scientific Corp., Marlborough, MA) balloon system. Patients were discharged directly from the outpatient clinic. RESULTS: Forty-seven dilations were performed in 22 patients with an average of 2.1 dilations/patient (range 1-10, standard deviation [SD] ± 2.2). Seventeen patients (77%) were male. The average age was 67 years (range 35-78 years, SD ± 8.5). The most common primary site of cancer was oral cavity/oropharynx (n = 10), followed by larynx (n = 6). All patients (100%) had history of radiation treatment. Four patients were postlaryngectomy. The indication for esophageal dilation was esophageal stricture and progressive dysphagia. All dilations occurred in the proximal esophagus. There were no major complications. Three focal, superficial lacerations occurred. Two patients experienced mild, self-limited epistaxis. One dilation was poorly tolerated due to discomfort. One patient required pain medication postprocedure. Office-based esophageal dilation generated $15,000 less in health system charges compared to traditional operating room dilation on average per episode of care. CONCLUSION: In patients with history of HNCA and radiation, office-based TNE with esophageal dilation appears safe, well-tolerated, and cost-effective. In a small cohort, the technique has low complication rate and is feasible in an otolaryngology outpatient office setting. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. Laryngoscope, 128:2261-2267, 2018.

Complete endoscopic sphincterotomy with vs. without large-balloon dilation for the removal of large bile duct stones: randomized multicenter study.

Background and study aims Endoscopic sphincterotomy plus large-balloon dilation (ES-LBD) has been reported as an alternative to endoscopic sphincterotomy for the removal of bile duct stones. This multicenter study compared complete endoscopic sphincterotomy with vs. without large-balloon dilation for the removal of large bile duct stones. This is the first randomized multicenter study to evaluate these procedures in patients with exclusively large common bile duct (CBD) stones. Methods Between 2010 and 2015, 150 patients with one or more common bile duct stones ≥ 13 mm were randomized to two groups: 73 without balloon dilation (conventional group), 77 with balloon dilation (ES-LBD group). Mechanical lithotripsy was subsequently performed only if the stones were too large for removal through the papilla. Endoscopic sphincterotomy was complete in both groups. Patients could switch to ES-LBD if the conventional procedure failed. Results There was no between-group difference in number and size of stones. CBD stone clearance was achieved in 74.0 % of patients in the conventional group and 96.1 % of patients in the ES-LBD group (P < 0.001). Mechanical lithotripsy was needed significantly more often in the conventional group (35.6 % vs. 3.9 %; P < 0.001). There was no difference in terms of morbidity (9.3 % in the conventional group vs. 8.1 % in the ES-LBD group; P = 0.82). The cost and procedure time were not significantly different between the groups overall, but became significantly higher for patients in the conventional group who underwent mechanical lithotripsy. The conventional procedure failed in 19 patients, 15 of whom underwent a rescue ES-LBD procedure that successfully cleared all stones. Conclusions Complete endoscopic sphincterotomy with large-balloon dilation for the removal of large CBD stones has similar safety but superior efficiency to conventional treatment, and should be considered as the first-line step in the treatment of large bile duct stones and in rescue treatment.Trial registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02592811).

Achalasia Treatment, Outcomes, Utilization, and Costs: A Population-Based Study from the United States.

BACKGROUND: Randomized trials show that pneumatic dilation (PD) ≥30 mm and laparoscopic myotomy (LM) provide equivalent symptom relief and disease-related quality of life for patients with achalasia. However, questions remain about the safety, burden, and costs of treatment options. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective cohort study of achalasia patients initially treated with PD or LM (2009 to 2014) using the Truven Health MarketScan Research Databases. All patients had 1 year of follow-up after initial treatment. We compared safety, health care use, and total and out-of-pocket costs using generalized linear models. RESULTS: Among 1,061 patients, 82% were treated with LM. The LM patients were younger (median age 49 vs 52 years; p < 0.01), but were similar in terms of sex (p = 0.80) and prevalence of comorbid conditions (p = 0.11). There were no significant differences in the 1-year cumulative risk of esophageal perforation (LM 0.8% vs PD 1.6%; p = 0.32) or 30-day mortality (LM 0.3% vs PD 0.5%; p = 0.71). Laparoscopic myotomy was associated with an 82% lower rate of reintervention (p < 0.01), a 29% lower rate of subsequent diagnostic testing (p < 0.01), and a 53% lower rate of readmission (p < 0.01). Total and out-of-pocket costs were not significantly different (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In the US, LM appears to be the preferred treatment for achalasia. Both LM and PD appear to be safe interventions. Along a short time horizon, the costs of LM and PD were not different. Mirroring findings from randomized trials, LM is associated with fewer reinterventions, less diagnostic testing, and fewer hospitalizations.

Economic evaluation of the randomized European Achalasia trial comparing pneumodilation with Laparoscopic Heller myotomy.

BACKGROUND: A recent multicenter randomized trial in achalasia patients has shown that pneumatic dilation resulted in equivalent relief of symptoms compared to laparoscopic Heller myotomy. Additionally, the cost of each treatment should be also taken in consideration. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to perform an economic analysis of the European achalasia trial. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed achalasia were enrolled from to 2003 to 2008 in 14 centers in five European countries and were randomly assigned to either pneumatic dilation (PD) or laparoscopic Heller (LHM). The economic analysis was performed in the three centers in three different countries where most patients were enrolled (Amsterdam [NL], Leuven, [B] and Padova [I]) and then applied to all patients included in the study. The total raw costs of the two treatments per patient include the initial costs, the costs of complications, and the costs of retreatments. RESULTS: Two hundred and one patients, 107 (57 males and 50 females, mean age 46 CI: 43-49 years) were randomized to LHM and 94 (59 males and 34 females, mean age 46 CI 43-50 years) to PD. The total cost of PD per patient was quite comparable in the three different centers; €3397 in Padova, €3259 in Amsterdam and €3792 in Leuven. For LHM, the total costs per patient were highest in Amsterdam: €4488 in Padova, €6720 in Amsterdam, and €5856 in Leuven. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the strategy of treating achalasia starting with PD appears the most economic approach, independent of the health system.

Balloon dilation of sinus ostia in the Department of Defense: Diagnoses, actual indications, and outcomes.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To determine the primary diagnoses for which balloon catheter dilation (BCD) of sinus ostia is being employed in a profit-blind health care system, the Department of Defense. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. METHODS: From January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2013, 319 consecutive patient charts were reviewed for International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Edition (ICD-9) diagnoses, presence of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) defined by the European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EPOS), preoperative Lund-Mackay scores, nasal endoscopy findings, sinuses dilated, postoperative outcomes, and complications. RESULTS: Of the 319 patients identified, 217 had sufficient documentation to be included. A CRS ICD-9 code was applied in 182 of 217 (83.9%) and recurrent acute rhinosinusitis in 12 of 217 (5.6%). Only 50.5% of CRS patient charts met criteria using EPOS guidelines. In contrast, 39.6% met the ICD-9 criteria for atypical facial pain. Patients with Lund-Mackay scores ≤ 4 were reviewed for number of sinuses dilated. Eighty-eight of 123 patients (71.5%) had sinuses dilated that were free from opacification/mucosal edema on preoperative imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Balloon dilation of sinus ostia has an expanding role in treating sinus disease. In the studied population, BCD is often utilized for alternate indications for which there is currently no evidence of efficacy. Future studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of this technology in treating these alternate indications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. Laryngoscope, 127:544-549, 2017.

Safe and effective management of esophageal coins in children with bougienage.

BACKGROUND: Coins are the foreign body most commonly ingested in infants and children. Coins retained in the esophagus require intervention to prevent complications. Management of retained esophageal coins remains variable both between and within institutions. We hypothesize that the incorporation of bougienage in the management of pediatric esophageal coins is safe and more cost-effective compared with traditional management strategies that use endoscopy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of infants and children diagnosed with an esophageal foreign body managed at Children's Hospital of Wisconsin between January 2003 and June 2012. Pediatric otolaryngologists (ear-nose-throat, ie, ENTs) or pediatric surgeons manage all children with esophageal foreign bodies in a prospective call schedule that alternates weekly. RESULTS: During an 8.5-year period, 1,642 children were diagnosed with esophageal foreign bodies and 518 had a retained coin. For esophageal coins, ENT managed 218 cases and pediatric surgery managed 300. ENTs preferentially used endoscopy for coin removal, whereas pediatric surgeons used either endoscopy or esophageal bougienage for selected children meeting specific criteria. Bougienage was successful at advancing the coin into the stomach in 94% of patients, and endoscopy was successful at removing the coin from the esophagus in 100% of patients. The mean duration of stay was 0.6 days for endoscopy by ENT, 0.6 days for endoscopy by pediatric surgery, and 0.1 days for bougienage (P < .05). The median hospital charge was $4,593 for endoscopy by ENT, $5,379 for endoscopy by pediatric surgery, and $579 for bougienage (P < .05). There were 3 complications each in the endoscopy group for ENT and pediatric surgery. There were no complications in children undergoing bougienage. CONCLUSION: This is the first case series evaluating the management of children with esophageal coins using a prospective assignment to endoscopy versus endoscopy or bougienage. Our data support bougienage as a safe and cost-effective treatment for managing retained esophageal coins in selected children.

Treatment of achalasia with laparoscopic myotomy or pneumatic dilatation: long-term results of a prospective, randomized study.

BACKGROUND: This study compares the long-term results of pneumatic dilatations versus laparoscopic myotomy using treatment failure as the primary outcome. The frequency and degree of dysphagia, the effects on quality of life (QoL), and health economy were also examined. METHODS: Fifty-three patients with achalasia were randomized to laparoscopic myotomy with a posterior partial fundoplication [laparoscopic myotomy (LM) n = 25] or repetitive pneumatic dilatation [pneumatic dilatation (PD) n = 28]. The median observation period was 81.5 months (range 12-131). RESULTS: At the minimal follow-up of 5 years, ten patients (36%) in the dilatation group and two patients (8%) in the myotomy group, including two patients lost to follow-up (one in each arm), were classified as failures (p = 0.016). The cumulative incidence of treatment failures was analyzed by survival statistics. Taking the entire follow-up period into account, a significant difference was observed in favor of the LM strategy (p = 0.02). Although both treatments resulted in significant improvements in dysphagia scores, LM was significantly favored over PD after 1 and 3 years, but not after 5 years. Health-related QoL assessed by the personal general well being score was higher in the LM group after 3 years, but the difference was not fully statistically significant at 5 years. Direct medical costs during the entire follow-up period were in median $13,421 for LM as compared to $5,558 for PD (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This long-term follow-up of a randomized clinical study shows that LM is superior to repetitive PD treatment of newly diagnosed achalasia, albeit that this surgical strategy is burdened by high initial direct medical costs. www.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT 02086669.

Which is the better treatment for the removal of large biliary stones? Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation versus endoscopic sphincterotomy.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: We evaluated the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) for large common bile duct (CBD) stone removal compared with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST). METHODS: A total of 1,580 patients who underwent endoscopic CBD stone extraction between January 2001 and July 2010 were reviewed. The following inclusion criteria were applied: choledocholithiasis treated by EPLBD with minor EST or EST with mechanical lithotripsy; and follow-up >9 months after treatment. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients with EPLBD and 41 with EST were compared. There was no significant difference in the complication rates and stone recurrence rates between the two groups. However, significantly more endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) sessions were required in the EST group to achieve the complete removal of stones (1.7 times vs 1.3 times; p=0.03). The mean cost required for complete stone removal per patient was significantly higher in the EST group compared to the EPLBD group (USD $1,644 vs $1,225, respectively; p=0.04). Dilated CBD was the only significant factor associated with recurrent biliary stones (relative risk, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.02 to 1.17; p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: EPLBD is the better treatment (compared to EST) for removing large CBD stones because EPLBD requires fewer ERCP sessions and is less expensive.

Eosinophilic esophagitis: dilate or medicate? A cost analysis model of the choice of initial therapy.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an increasingly recognized clinical entity. The optimal initial treatment strategy in adults with EoE remains controversial. The aim of this study was to employ a decision analysis model to determine the less costly option between the two most commonly employed treatment strategies in EoE. We constructed a model for an index case of a patient with biopsy-proven EoE who continues to be symptomatic despite proton-pump inhibitor therapy. The following treatment strategies were included: (i) swallowed fluticasone inhaler (followed by esophagogastroduodenoscopy [EGD] with dilation if ineffective); and (ii) EGD with dilation (followed by swallowed fluticasone inhaler if ineffective). The time horizon was 1 year. The model focused on cost analysis of initial treatment strategies. The perspective of the healthcare payer was used. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the model. For every patient whose symptoms improved or resolved with the strategy of fluticasone first followed by EGD, if necessary, it cost an average of $1078. Similarly, it cost an average of $1171 per patient if EGD with dilation was employed first. Sensitivity analyses indicated that initial treatment with fluticasone was the less costly strategy to improve dysphagia symptoms as long as the effectiveness of fluticasone remains at or above 0.62. Swallowed fluticasone inhaler (followed by EGD with dilation if necessary) is the more economical initial strategy when compared with EGD with dilation first.

Which Is the Better Treatment for the Removal of Large Biliary Stones? Endoscopic Papillary Large Balloon Dilation versus Endoscopic Sphincterotomy

BACKGROUND/AIMS: We evaluated the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) for large common bile duct (CBD) stone removal compared with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST). METHODS: A total of 1,580 patients who underwent endoscopic CBD stone extraction between January 2001 and July 2010 were reviewed. The following inclusion criteria were applied: choledocholithiasis treated by EPLBD with minor EST or EST with mechanical lithotripsy; and follow-up >9 months after treatment. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients with EPLBD and 41 with EST were compared. There was no significant difference in the complication rates and stone recurrence rates between the two groups. However, significantly more endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) sessions were required in the EST group to achieve the complete removal of stones (1.7 times vs 1.3 times; p=0.03). The mean cost required for complete stone removal per patient was significantly higher in the EST group compared to the EPLBD group (USD $1,644 vs $1,225, respectively; p=0.04). Dilated CBD was the only significant factor associated with recurrent biliary stones (relative risk, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.02 to 1.17; p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: EPLBD is the better treatment (compared to EST) for removing large CBD stones because EPLBD requires fewer ERCP sessions and is less expensive.

[The role of routine chest radiography after percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy. A prospective randomized study]. / Bedeutung der routinemäßigen Röntgenkontrolle nach perkutaner Dilatationstracheotomie. Eine prospektive randomisierte Studie.

BACKGROUND: Routine chest radiography (X-ray) after percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy has been considered standard procedure in the past. However, recent observations show this to be unnecessary and cost ineffective. Prospective randomised trials have been lacking. PATIENT AND METHODS: Critically ill patients admitted to an ICU with an indication for a percutaneous tracheostomy were consecutively randomized into group 1 (routine postprocedural chest X-ray) and group 2 (chest X-ray only when considered clinically indicated). Tracheostomy was performed under bronchoscopic guidance. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients (50 per group) were included. Three major complications were observed in group 1 and one presumed complication in group 2. There were 11 minor complications in group 1 and 16 in group 2. Routine chest X-ray in group 1 did not reveal any abnormality related to the tracheostomy. A control chest X-ray was considered necessary in only one patient in group 2, but with no pathological change observed. CONCLUSION: Routine chest radiography after a percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy conducted under fibre optic bronchoscopic guidance is probably not useful.

Self dilation as a treatment for resistant benign esophageal strictures: outcome, technique, and quality of life assessment.

BACKGROUND: Resistant benign esophageal strictures can have a negative impact on patients' quality of life. A portion of these patients require frequent physician performed dilations, leading to numerous interactions with their attendant inconvenience and sense of dependence. This study demonstrates the efficacy, safety and effect on quality of life of this under-utilized technique. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed for all patients undergoing esophageal self dilation at our institution between January 2003 and November 2009. The impact on quality of life was evaluated using a telephone questionnaire specifically designed to explore emotional, social and financial impacts. RESULTS: Of the 11 patients who initially began self dilation for non-malignant strictures, nine are included in this study. Median follow-up was 35.4 months (range 6-168). No significant complications were reported. When asked to compare self dilation with physician performed dilation a large proportion of patients reported financial benefits, and a majority reported being more socially active. Overall quality of life improvement was reported by almost all of the participants in the study. Global scores for dysphagia and overall quality of life were significantly improved under conditions of self dilation versus physician performed dilation (P = 0.008 and P = 0.016, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that esophageal self dilation can be a safe and effective treatment modality in motivated patients with benign resistant esophageal strictures. Esophageal self dilation has a positive impact on emotional, social, and financial aspects of patient's life. Self dilation should be considered a treatment option in all patients with benign resistant esophageal strictures.

Comparative study of balloon and metal olive dilators for endoscopic management of benign anastomotic rectal strictures: clinical and cost-effectiveness outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative anastomotic strictures frequently complicate colorectal resection. Currently, various endoscopic techniques are being employed in their management, but the establishment of an optimal therapeutic strategy is still pending. The purpose of our study is to compare through-the-scope (TTS) balloon dilators versus Eder-Puestow metal olive dilators in the treatment of postoperative benign rectal strictures, considering the clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness of each method. METHODS: A total of 39 patients with benign anastomotic rectal stenosis were retrospectively studied. In group A, 15 patients underwent dilation with Eder-Puestow metal olives, while in group B 19 patients were treated by means of TTS balloon dilators. The technical and clinical success of dilation, complications, number of repeated sessions required, disease-free time intervals, and the overall cost of each procedure were evaluated. RESULTS: Dilations were technically successful in all patients. No major complications occurred in either group. The number of dilations needed, rate of stricture recurrence, and duration of stenosis-free time intervals were not statistically significantly different between the two groups. Both methods proved more effective in older patients, given the greater number of dilations required in younger patients of both groups and higher frequency of stricture relapse in younger balloon-dilated patients (median 64.00 years) compared with older ones (median 75.00 years) (p = 0.001). An indisputable advantage of the Eder-Puestow technique, compared with TTS balloon dilators, is the low cost of equipment (median 22.30 compared with 680 , respectively; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Endoscopic dilation of postoperative benign rectal strictures is equally effective and safe, especially in older patients, when performed by Eder-Puestow bougies or TTS balloon dilators. However, metal olivary tips seem to surpass balloon dilators when considering the obvious economical benefits of the first method.

[The cost-efficiency and safety of bedside forceps dilatational tracheostomy in the intensive care unit].

OBJECTIVE: To study the cost-efficiency and safety of bedside forceps dilatational tracheostomy (FDT) in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: FDT was performed in 83 patients who needed prolonged artificial airway. The time interval between the decision and actual time of operation, time for completing the procedure, operation cost, perioperative and postoperative complications were recorded and analyzed. The operation cost was compared between 83 FDT cases and other 102 surgical tracheostomy (ST) cases which were performed in the operation room during the same period. RESULTS: FDT was successfully performed for 83 patients. The average time interval between the decision and undertaking FDT was (11.5±8.5) hours, the average operating time was (14.5±5.5) minutes, the operation cost of FDT [(1 560±340) yuan] was lower than that of ST [(2 600±450) yuan, P <0.05]. The incidence of the perioperative and postoperative complication of the 83 patients was 15.66% and 2.41% respectively. Nine patients died within 28 days after FDT. CONCLUSION: FDT performed by intensivists for critically ill patients in ICU is safe and cost-effective.

Office dilation of the female urethra: a quality of care problem in the field of urology.

PURPOSE: Historically dilation of the female urethra was thought to be of value in the treatment of a variety of lower urinary tract symptoms. Subsequent work has more accurately classified these complaints as parts of various diseases or syndromes in which scant data exist to support the use of dilation. Yet Medicare reimbursement for urethral dilation remains generous and we describe practice patterns regarding female urethral dilation to characterize a potential quality of care issue. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Health care use by females treated with urethral dilation was compiled using a complementary set of databases. Data sets were examined for relevant inpatient, outpatient and emergency room services for women of all ages. RESULTS: Female urethral dilation is common (929 per 100,000 patients) and is performed almost as much as treatment for male urethral stricture disease. Approximately 12% of these patients are subjected to costly studies such as retrograde urethrography. The overall national costs for treatment exceed $61 million per year and have increased 10% to 17% a year since 1994. A diagnosis of female urethral stricture increases health care expenditures by more than $1,800 per individual per year in insured populations. CONCLUSIONS: Urethral dilation is still common despite the fact that true female urethral stricture is an uncommon entity. This scenario is likely secondary to the persistence of the mostly discarded practice of dilating the unstrictured female urethra for a wide variety of complaints despite the lack of data suggesting that it improves lower urinary tract symptoms.

Balloon dilatation versus Amplatz dilatation for nephrostomy tract dilatation.

PURPOSE: In this study, we present our experience using balloon and Amplatz dilatation to establish a percutaneous tract. We also discuss advantages and risk factors of both techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed medical records of 229 patients who had undergone 235 percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures. The nephrostomy tract had been dilated using a balloon (42 patients) or Amplatz (187 patients) dilator. Total operating time, preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin concentrations, number of tracts required, stone burden, blood transfusion rates, tract dilatation failures, and the cost of the dilatation system were compared between the groups. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in operative time (85.7+/-43.2 v 86.3+/-41.2 minutes; P=0.42), preoperative hemoglobin concentration (14.1+/-1.1 v 13.8+/-1.4 mg/dL; P= .153), postoperative hemoglobin concentration (11.6+/-1.7 v 11.2+/-1.5 mg/dL; P= .601), or blood transfusion rate (18.6% v 21.3%; P= .687) between the two groups. Also, there were no differences in failure rates between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The Amplatz dilator is comparable with the balloon dilator with regard to efficacy, speed, and safety. The Amplatz dilator is more cost-effective than the balloon dilator. However, kidney hypermobility may be a significant problem during Amplatz dilatation.