Suppr超能文献

WHO Ⅱ级脑胶质瘤在功能区的最大安全切除的成本-效用分析。

Cost-utility of maximal safe resection of WHO grade II gliomas within eloquent areas.

机构信息

Department of Neurological Surgery, Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla and Instituto de Formación e Investigación Marqués de Valdecilla, Av de Valdecilla s/n, Santander, Cantabria, Spain.

出版信息

Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2013 Jan;155(1):41-50. doi: 10.1007/s00701-012-1541-8. Epub 2012 Nov 7.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Despite the growing use of intraoperative electrical stimulation (IES) mapping for resection of WHO grade II gliomas (GIIG) located within eloquent areas, some authors claim that this is a complex, time-consuming and expensive approach, and not well tolerated by patients, so they rely on other mapping techniques. Here we analyze the health related quality of life, direct and indirect costs of surgeries with and without intraoperative electrical stimulation (IES) mapping for resection of GIIG within eloquent areas.

METHODS

A cohort of 11 subjects with GIIG within eloquent areas who had IES while awake (group A) was matched by tumor side and location to a cohort of 11 subjects who had general anesthesia without IES (group B). Direct and indirect costs (measured as loss of labor productivity) and utility (measured in quality adjusted life years, QALYs), were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Total mean direct costs per patient were $38,662.70 (range $19,950.70 to $61,626.40) in group A, and $32,116.10 (range $22,764.50 to $46,222.50) in group B (p = 0.279). Total mean indirect costs per patient were $10,640.10 (range $3,010.10 to $86,940.70) in group A, and $48,804.70 (range $3,340.10 to $98,400.60) in group B (p = 0.035). Mean costs per QALY were $12,222.30 (range $3,801.10 to $47,422.90) in group A, and $31,927.10 (range $6,642.90 to $64,196.50) in group B (p = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

Asleep-awake-asleep craniotomies with IES are associated with an increase in direct costs. However, these initial expenses are ultimately offset by medium and long-term costs averted from a decrease in morbidity and preservation of the patient's professional life. The present study emphasizes the importance to switch to an aggressive and safer surgical strategy in GIIG within eloquent areas.

摘要

背景

尽管术中电刺激(IES)映射在切除位于功能区的世界卫生组织(WHO)二级胶质瘤(GIIG)方面的应用越来越多,但一些作者声称,这是一种复杂、耗时且昂贵的方法,并且患者难以接受,因此他们依赖于其他映射技术。在这里,我们分析了在功能区切除 GIIG 时使用和不使用术中电刺激(IES)映射的手术的健康相关生活质量、直接和间接成本。

方法

一组 11 名在清醒时接受 IES 的位于功能区的 GIIG 患者(A 组)按肿瘤侧和位置与一组 11 名接受全身麻醉而不进行 IES 的患者(B 组)相匹配。比较两组之间的直接和间接成本(以劳动力生产力损失衡量)和效用(以质量调整生命年(QALYs)衡量)。

结果

A 组每位患者的平均直接总成本为 38662.70 美元(范围为 19950.70 美元至 61626.40 美元),B 组为 32116.10 美元(范围为 22764.50 美元至 46222.50 美元)(p=0.279)。A 组每位患者的平均间接总成本为 10640.10 美元(范围为 3010.10 美元至 86940.70 美元),B 组为 48804.70 美元(范围为 3340.10 美元至 98400.60 美元)(p=0.035)。A 组每位患者的平均成本每 QALY 为 12222.30 美元(范围为 3801.10 美元至 47422.90 美元),B 组为 31927.10 美元(范围为 6642.90 美元至 64196.50 美元)(p=0.023)。

结论

在功能区进行清醒-睡眠-清醒开颅术并使用 IES 会导致直接成本增加。然而,这些初始费用最终会因发病率降低和患者职业生活得到保留而带来的中长期费用节省而得到弥补。本研究强调了在功能区切除 GIIG 时转向积极且更安全的手术策略的重要性。

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