Economic impact analysis of a minimally invasive temperature-controlled radiofrequency device versus nasal surgery for the treatment of nasal airway obstruction in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the economic impact of a minimally invasive temperature-controlled radiofrequency (TCRF) device for treating nasal airway obstruction (NAO). METHODS: A budget impact model was developed for two scenarios: a reference scenario of functional rhinoplasty surgery with concomitant septoplasty and inferior turbinate reduction (ITR) performed in the hospital outpatient department where TCRF is not an available treatment option and a new scenario consisting of in-office TCRF treatment of the nasal valve and ITR. A payor perspective was adopted with a hypothetical population plan size of one million members. Costs were estimated over a time horizon of 4 years. The eligible population included patients with severe/extreme NAO and nasal valve collapse (NVC) as the primary cause or significant contributor. Data inputs were sourced from targeted literature reviews. Uncertainty within the model structure and input parameters was assessed using one-way sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: The introduction of a TCRF device resulted in population-level cost savings of $20,015,123 and per-responder average cost savings of $3531 through a 4-year time horizon due to lower procedure costs and complication rates of the device relative to the surgical comparator. Results were robust when varying parameter values in sensitivity analyses, with cost savings being most sensitive to the prevalence of NAO and estimated response rates to functional rhinoplasty and TCRF. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe/extreme NAO, with NVC as the primary or major contributor, introducing TCRF with ITR as a treatment option demonstrates the potential for significant cost savings over functional rhinoplasty with septoplasty and ITR.

Nasal valve dysfunction is a common cause of nasal airway obstruction (NAO) that has a significant impact on heath and quality of life for affected individuals. Previously, patients were offered temporary measures or a type of surgery called functional rhinoplasty which is a highly complex surgery that can be costly, requires recovery time, and in rare cases, not be successful. Recently, a new minimally invasive treatment alternative for NAO called temperature-controlled radiofrequency (TCRF) that may be performed in a surgery center or a doctor's office has become available. This paper provides the results of budget impact analysis performed to assess whether adding the TCRF procedure in place of surgery as a choice for patients with NAO will result in cost savings to an insurance payer with 1 million covered individuals in the United States over a period of 4 years. Results show that TCRF may result in an average of 9,416 fewer rhinoplasty surgeries, provide an average 4-year cost-savings of $3,531 for every patient that responds to TCRF treatment, and a savings of $20,015,123 over 4 years for the insurance provider. These potential cost savings over 4 years would likely be due to reduced procedure costs and complication rates compared to surgery.

Clinical Utility of Plasma Microbial Cell-Free DNA Sequencing Among Immunocompromised Patients With Pneumonia.

Background: Plasma microbial cell-free DNA (mcfDNA) sequencing can establish the etiology of multiple infectious syndromes by identifying microbial DNA in plasma. However, data are needed to define the clinical scenarios where this tool offers the highest clinical benefit. Methods: We conducted a prospective multicenter observational study that evaluated the impact of plasma mcfDNA sequencing compared with usual care testing among adults with hematologic malignancies. This is a secondary analysis of an expanded cohort that evaluated the clinical utility of plasma mcfDNA sequencing across prespecified and adjudicated outcomes. We examined the percentage of participants for whom plasma mcfDNA sequencing identified a probable cause of pneumonia or clinically relevant nonpneumonia infection. We then assessed potential changes in antimicrobial therapy based on plasma mcfDNA sequencing results and the potential for early mcfDNA testing to avoid bronchoscopy and its associated adverse events. Results: Of 223 participants, at least 1 microbial detection by plasma mcfDNA sequencing was adjudicated as a probable cause of pneumonia in 57 (25.6%) and a clinically relevant nonpneumonia infection in 88 (39.5%). A probable cause of pneumonia was exclusively identified by plasma mcfDNA sequencing in 23 (10.3%) participants. Antimicrobial therapy would have changed for 41 (18.4%) participants had plasma mcfDNA results been available in real time. Among the 57 participants with a probable cause of pneumonia identified by plasma mcfDNA sequencing, bronchoscopy identified no additional probable cause of pneumonia in 52 (91.2%). Conclusions: Plasma mcfDNA sequencing could improve management of both pneumonia and other concurrent infections in immunocompromised patients with suspected pneumonia.