Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Intermountain Health, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Am J Perinatol. 2024 May;41(S 01):e2454-e2462. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-1771262. Epub 2023 Jul 21.
We aimed to compare costs of two strategies for third-trimester type II vasa previa management: (1) fetoscopic laser ablation surgery (FLS) referral and (2) standard management (SM).
A decision analytic model and cost-benefit analysis from a health care perspective were performed. The population included patients with type II vasa previa at approximately 32 weeks. SM entailed 32-week antepartum admission and cesarean at approximately 35 weeks. FLS referral included consultation and possible laser surgery at 32 weeks for willing/eligible candidates. Successful laser surgery allowed the possibility of term vaginal delivery. Outcomes included antepartum admission, preterm birth, cesarean, neonatal transfusion, and death. Sensitivity analyses were performed.
In base case analysis, FLS referral was cost saving compared with SM (total cost per patient $65,717.10 vs. 71,628.16). FLS referrals yielded fewer antepartum admissions, cesareans, premature births, neonatal transfusions, and deaths. Eligible referred patients choosing FLS incurred a total cost of $41,702.46, a >40% decrease compared with SM. FLS referral was cost saving in all one-way sensitivity analyses except when antepartum admission costs were low. In threshold analyses, FLS referral was cost saving unless laser surgery cost was >$39,892 (2.75x expected cost), antepartum admission cost for monitoring of vasa previa or ruptured membranes was <$7,455, <11% patients were eligible for laser surgery, and when <12% of eligible patients chose laser surgery. In two-way sensitivity analysis, FLS referral was cost saving except at very high laser surgery costs and extremely low antepartum admission costs.
Referral for FLS for type II vasa previa was cost saving and improved outcomes compared with SM, despite upfront costs, fetoscopy-related risks, and many patients being ineligible or not opting for surgery after referral.
· Vasa previa rupture may lead to fetal exsanguination and death.. · Late preterm cesarean is common practice for prenatally diagnosed vasa previa.. · Successful fetoscopic laser ablation for type II vasa previa has been described.. · Laser ablation of vasa previa allows for a safe-term vaginal delivery.. · Referral for laser surgery is cost saving and is associated with improved outcomes..
比较两种三期末型前置血管处理策略的成本:(1)胎儿镜激光消融术(FLS)转诊和(2)标准管理(SM)。
从医疗保健角度进行决策分析模型和成本效益分析。该人群包括大约 32 周时患有 II 型前置血管的患者。SM 包括 32 周时的产前入院和大约 35 周时的剖宫产。FLS 转诊包括有意愿/合格的患者在 32 周时进行咨询和可能的激光手术。成功的激光手术允许有足月阴道分娩的可能。结果包括产前入院、早产、剖宫产、新生儿输血和死亡。进行了敏感性分析。
在基础案例分析中,与 SM 相比,FLS 转诊具有成本效益(每位患者的总费用为 65717.10 美元,而 71628.16 美元)。FLS 转诊减少了产前入院、剖宫产、早产、新生儿输血和死亡的次数。选择 FLS 的合格转诊患者总费用为 41702.46 美元,与 SM 相比下降了超过 40%。除了产前入院费用较低的情况外,FLS 转诊在所有单向敏感性分析中均具有成本效益。在阈值分析中,除非激光手术费用超过 39892 美元(预期成本的 2.75 倍),监测前置血管或胎膜破裂的产前入院费用低于 7455 美元,不到 11%的患者有资格进行激光手术,且不到 12%的合格患者选择激光手术,否则 FLS 转诊具有成本效益。在双向敏感性分析中,除了激光手术费用极高和产前入院费用极低的情况外,FLS 转诊具有成本效益。
与 SM 相比,对于 II 型前置血管,转诊进行 FLS 不仅具有成本效益,而且改善了结局,尽管存在前期费用、胎儿镜相关风险以及许多患者不适合或不愿意在转诊后进行手术。
·前置血管破裂可能导致胎儿失血性休克和死亡。·对于产前诊断的前置血管,晚期早产剖宫产是常见做法。·成功的胎儿镜激光消融治疗 II 型前置血管已有报道。·激光消融治疗前置血管可安全进行足月阴道分娩。·转诊进行激光手术具有成本效益,并与改善的结果相关。