Suppr超能文献

带有 12 个月随访的金属输尿管支架的成本分析。

Cost analysis of metallic ureteral stents with 12 months of follow-up.

机构信息

Division of Urology, Southern Illinois University, Springfield, Illinois 62794-9665, USA.

出版信息

J Endourol. 2012 Jul;26(7):917-21. doi: 10.1089/end.2011.0481. Epub 2012 Apr 17.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The metallic ureteral stent was first developed for patients with ureteral obstruction related to malignant disease, but it can be used in all patients needing chronic indwelling ureteral stents, including those with benign disease. The traditional method of polymer stent management often necessitates multiple exchanges per year depending on patient and logistical factors. This has significant direct financial cost and likely a negative effect on patients' overall health. The objective was to analyze and compare the costs associated with chronic indwelling metal and silicone-based ureteral stents.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective database of patients undergoing metal stent placement from February 2008 to June 2010 was reviewed. Mean charges for a single traditional nonmetal and metal stent insertion were calculated. Charges were based on direct hospital charges related to stent cost and surgery. Cost data were based on the fiscal year 2010 cost for polymer or metal stent insertions.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients underwent metal stent placement at our institution. Of these, three traditional stent placements were omitted from analysis because of bundled charges for ureteroscopy at the same setting. Mean charges per single traditional and metal stent placement were $6072.75 and $9469.50, respectively. The estimated annual charges for traditional stents (3-6 exchanges) would be $18,218.25 to $36,436.50. Compared with metal stents, this is a potential financial savings of 48% to 74%. The mean direct cost to patients was 21.6% and 25.4% of the charges for metal and polymer stents, respectively. No patient needed early discontinuation of his or her metal stent because of lower urinary tract symptoms or gross hematuria.

CONCLUSIONS

Metal stents are well tolerated by patients with ureteral obstruction of various etiologies and provide a significant financial benefit compared with polymer ureteral stents. For patients who are not fit for surgical intervention regarding their ureteral occlusive disease, the metal Resonance stent is a financially advantageous and well-tolerated option.

摘要

背景与目的

金属输尿管支架最初是为恶性疾病相关输尿管梗阻的患者开发的,但它也可用于所有需要长期留置输尿管支架的患者,包括良性疾病患者。根据患者和后勤因素,传统的聚合物支架管理方法通常需要每年多次更换。这会带来显著的直接财务成本,并且可能对患者的整体健康产生负面影响。本研究旨在分析和比较慢性留置金属和硅胶输尿管支架相关的成本。

患者与方法

回顾了 2008 年 2 月至 2010 年 6 月期间接受金属支架置入术的患者的前瞻性数据库。计算了单个传统非金属和金属支架置入的平均费用。费用基于与支架成本和手术相关的直接医院费用。成本数据基于 2010 财年聚合物或金属支架置入的成本。

结果

本机构 21 例患者接受了金属支架置入。由于在同一环境下进行输尿管镜检查的捆绑收费,其中 3 例传统支架置入被排除在分析之外。单个传统和金属支架置入的平均费用分别为 6072.75 美元和 9469.50 美元。传统支架(3-6 次更换)的估计年度费用将为 18218.25 美元至 36436.50 美元。与金属支架相比,这是 48%至 74%的潜在节省。金属和聚合物支架的直接患者费用平均分别为费用的 21.6%和 25.4%。没有患者因下尿路症状或肉眼血尿而需要提前终止其金属支架。

结论

对于各种病因引起的输尿管梗阻患者,金属支架具有良好的耐受性,与聚合物输尿管支架相比具有显著的经济优势。对于不适合手术干预其输尿管闭塞性疾病的患者,金属 Resonance 支架是一种具有经济优势且耐受性良好的选择。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验