Goor K M, Mahieu H F, Leemans C R, Peeters A J, Langendijk J A, van Agthoven M
Erasmus Medisch Centrum, Institute for Medical Technology Assessment/Instituut Beleid en Management Gezondheidszorg, Postbus 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam.
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2003 Jun 14;147(24):1177-81.
Given that CO2-laser decortication and radiotherapy are equally effective in the treatment of T1a glottic carcinomas, to determine which of the two is most efficient with respect to treatment costs.
Retrospective analysis.
The costs of both treatment modalities from the first visit to the Free University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, until two years after the start of the treatment were calculated, based on the medical consumption of 89 patients who were treated with curative intent for a T1a glottic carcinoma in the years 1995-1999.
The total costs from diagnosis until two years after the start of treatment were [symbol: see text] 7,253,- for radiotherapy and [symbol: see text] 3,864,- for CO2-laser decortication. These amounts included the costs of diagnosis and treatment of any recurrence or benign laryngeal disorders occurring within the two-year interval. The difference was statistically significant.
Radiotherapy was significantly more expensive than CO2-laser decortication. Therefore CO2-laser decortication is an efficient alternative to radiotherapy in the treatment of eligible patients with T1a glottic carcinoma.
鉴于二氧化碳激光剥脱术和放射治疗在T1a期声门癌的治疗中效果相当，确定两者在治疗成本方面哪一种最具效率。
回顾性分析。
根据1995年至1999年期间89例接受T1a期声门癌根治性治疗患者的医疗消耗，计算从首次就诊于荷兰阿姆斯特丹自由大学医学中心到治疗开始后两年这两种治疗方式的成本。
从诊断到治疗开始后两年的总成本，放射治疗为7253荷兰盾，二氧化碳激光剥脱术为3864荷兰盾。这些金额包括两年间隔内出现的任何复发或良性喉部疾病的诊断和治疗费用。差异具有统计学意义。
放射治疗的费用明显高于二氧化碳激光剥脱术。因此，对于符合条件的T1a期声门癌患者，二氧化碳激光剥脱术是放射治疗的一种有效替代方法。
