Literature DB >> 22337381

Cost of treating sagittal synostosis in the first year of life.

Megan M Abbott1, Gary F Rogers, Mark R Proctor, Kathleen Busa, John G Meara.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Endoscopically assisted suturectomy (EAS) has been reported to reduce the morbidity and cost of treating sagittal synostosis when compared with traditional open cranial vault remodeling (CVR) procedures. Whereas the former claim is well substantiated and intuitive, the latter has not been validated by rigorous cost analysis.
METHODS: Patient medical records and financial database reports were culled retrospectively to determine the total cost associated with both EAS and CVR during 1 year of care. Recorded cost data included physician and hospital services, orthotic equipment and fittings, and indirect patient cost.
RESULTS: Ten patients treated with CVR were compared with 10 patients who underwent EAS. The CVR patients incurred greater costs in nearly all categories studied, including overall 1-year costs, physician services, hospital services, supplies/equipment, medications/intravenous fluids, and laboratory and blood bank services. Postoperative costs were greater in the EAS group, primarily because of the cost associated with orthotic services and indirect patient costs for travel and lost work. However, overall indirect patient costs for the whole year did not differ between the groups. One-year median costs were $55,121 for CVR and $23,377 for EAS. Early clinical results were similar for the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Cranial vault remodeling was more costly in the first year of treatment than EAS, although indirect patient costs were similar. The favorable cost of EAS compared with CVR provides further justification to consider this procedure as first-line treatment of sagittal synostosis in young infants.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22337381     DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0b013e318240f965

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Craniofac Surg        ISSN: 1049-2275            Impact factor:   1.046


  9 in total

1.  Effects of open and endoscopic surgery on skull growth and calvarial vault volumes in sagittal synostosis.

Authors:  Rahel G Ghenbot; Kamlesh B Patel; Gary B Skolnick; Sybill D Naidoo; Matthew D Smyth; Albert S Woo
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 1.046

2.  Single incision endoscope-assisted surgery for sagittal craniosynostosis.

Authors:  Rajiv R Iyer; Rafael Uribe-Cardenas; Edward S Ahn
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2016-10-11       Impact factor: 1.475

Review 3.  Genetic advances in craniosynostosis.

Authors:  Wanda Lattanzi; Marta Barba; Lorena Di Pietro; Simeon A Boyadjiev
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2017-02-04       Impact factor: 2.802

Review 4.  Applying economic principles to outcomes analysis.

Authors:  Melissa J Shauver; Kevin C Chung
Journal:  Clin Plast Surg       Date:  2012-11-26       Impact factor: 2.017

Review 5.  Endoscopic craniosynostosis repair.

Authors:  Mark R Proctor
Journal:  Transl Pediatr       Date:  2014-07

Review 6.  Endoscopic versus open approach in craniosynostosis repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes.

Authors:  Anshit Goyal; Victor M Lu; Yagiz U Yolcu; Mohamed Elminawy; David J Daniels
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2018-06-30       Impact factor: 1.475

7.  Macropore design of tissue engineering scaffolds regulates mesenchymal stem cell differentiation fate.

Authors:  W Benton Swanson; Maiko Omi; Zhen Zhang; Hwa Kyung Nam; Younghun Jung; Gefei Wang; Peter X Ma; Nan E Hatch; Yuji Mishina
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2021-03-24       Impact factor: 12.479

8.  Dipyridamole-loaded 3D-printed bioceramic scaffolds stimulate pediatric bone regeneration in vivo without disruption of craniofacial growth through facial maturity.

Authors:  Maxime M Wang; Roberto L Flores; Lukasz Witek; Andrea Torroni; Amel Ibrahim; Zhong Wang; Hannah A Liss; Bruce N Cronstein; Christopher D Lopez; Samantha G Maliha; Paulo G Coelho
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-12-05       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  A 24-month cost and outcome analysis comparing traditional fronto-orbital advancment and remodeling with endoscopic strip craniectomy and molding helmet in the management of unicoronal craniosynostosis: A retrospective bi-institutional review.

Authors:  B A Jivraj; N Ahmed; K Karia; R Menon; E Robertson; A Sodha; J C R Wormald; J O'hara; O Jeelani; D Dunaway; G James; J Ong
Journal:  JPRAS Open       Date:  2019-02-01
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.