Literature DB >> 12511668

Living renal donors: optimizing the imaging strategy--decision- and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Ylian S Liem1, Marc C J M Kock, Jan N M Ijzermans, Willem Weimar, Karen Visser, M G Myriam Hunink.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the most cost-effective strategy for preoperative imaging performed in potential living renal donors.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a decision-analytic model, the societal cost-effectiveness of digital subtraction angiography (DSA), gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) angiography, contrast material-enhanced spiral computed tomographic (CT) angiography, and combinations of these imaging techniques was evaluated. Outcome measures included lifetime cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. A base-case analysis was performed with a 40-year-old female donor and a 40-year-old female recipient.
RESULTS: For the donor, MR angiography (24.05 QALYs and 9,000 dollars) dominated all strategies except for MR angiography with CT angiography, which had an incremental ratio of 245,000 dollars per QALY. For the recipient, DSA and DSA with MR angiography yielded similar results (10.46 QALYs and 179,000 dollars) and dominated all other strategies. When results for donor and recipient were combined, DSA dominated all other strategies (34.51 QALYs and 188,000 dollars). If DSA was associated with a 99% specificity or less for detection of renal disease, MR angiography with CT angiography was superior (34.47 QALYs and 190,000 dollars).
CONCLUSION: For preoperative imaging in a potential renal donor, DSA is the most cost-effective strategy if it has a specificity greater than 99% for detection of renal disease; otherwise, MR angiography with CT angiography is the most cost-effective strategy. Copyright RSNA, 2002

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12511668     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2261011893

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  5 in total

1.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of weekday and weeknight or weekend shifts for assessment of appendicitis.

Authors:  Andrea S Doria; Heidi Amernic; Paul Dick; Paul Babyn; Peter Chait; Jacob Langer; Peter C Coyte; Wendy J Ungar
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2005-09-15

2.  A Systematic Review of Kidney Transplantation Decision Modelling Studies.

Authors:  Mohsen Yaghoubi; Sonya Cressman; Louisa Edwards; Steven Shechter; Mary M Doyle-Waters; Paul Keown; Ruth Sapir-Pichhadze; Stirling Bryan
Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy       Date:  2022-08-09       Impact factor: 3.686

3.  Evidence of spillover of illness among household members: EQ-5D scores from a US sample.

Authors:  Eve Wittenberg; Grant A Ritter; Lisa A Prosser
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2012-10-25       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  Optimizing Live Kidney Donor Workup: A Decision Analysis Approach.

Authors:  Jian Y Cheng; Andrew Martin; Ganesh Ramanathan; Bruce A Cooper
Journal:  Transplant Direct       Date:  2018-04-05

Review 5.  Cost-utility analysis in chronic kidney disease patients undergoing kidney transplant; what pays? A systematic review.

Authors:  Sameera Senanayake; Nicholas Graves; Helen Healy; Keshwar Baboolal; Sanjeewa Kularatna
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2020-05-19
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.