Gurpreet S Gandhoke1, Matthew Pease1, Kenneth J Smith2, Raymond F Sekula3. 1. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. 2. Section of Decision Sciences, Center for Research on Health Care, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. 3. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. Electronic address: sekularf@upmc.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To perform a cost-minimization study comparing the supraorbital and endoscopic endonasal (EEA) approach with or without craniotomy for the resection of olfactory groove meningiomas (OGMs). METHODS: We built a decision tree using probabilities of gross total resection (GTR) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak rates with the supraorbital approach versus EEA with and without additional craniotomy. The cost (not charge or reimbursement) at each "stem" of this decision tree for both surgical options was obtained from our hospital's finance department. After a base case calculation, we applied plausible ranges to all parameters and carried out multiple 1-way sensitivity analyses. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed our results. RESULTS: The probabilities of GTR (0.8) and CSF leak (0.2) for the supraorbital craniotomy were obtained from our series of 5 patients who underwent a supraorbital approach for the resection of an OGM. The mean tumor volume was 54.6 cm3 (range, 17-94.2 cm3). Literature-reported rates of GTR (0.6) and CSF leak (0.3) with EEA were applied to our economic analysis. Supraorbital craniotomy was the preferred strategy, with an expected value of $29,423, compared with an EEA cost of $83,838. On multiple 1-way sensitivity analyses, supraorbital craniotomy remained the preferred strategy, with a minimum cost savings of $46,000 and a maximum savings of $64,000. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis found the lowest cost difference between the 2 surgical options to be $37,431. CONCLUSION: Compared with EEA, supraorbital craniotomy provides substantial cost savings in the treatment of OGMs. Given the potential differences in effectiveness between approaches, a cost-effectiveness analysis should be undertaken.
OBJECTIVE: To perform a cost-minimization study comparing the supraorbital and endoscopic endonasal (EEA) approach with or without craniotomy for the resection of olfactory groove meningiomas (OGMs). METHODS: We built a decision tree using probabilities of gross total resection (GTR) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak rates with the supraorbital approach versus EEA with and without additional craniotomy. The cost (not charge or reimbursement) at each "stem" of this decision tree for both surgical options was obtained from our hospital's finance department. After a base case calculation, we applied plausible ranges to all parameters and carried out multiple 1-way sensitivity analyses. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed our results. RESULTS: The probabilities of GTR (0.8) and CSF leak (0.2) for the supraorbital craniotomy were obtained from our series of 5 patients who underwent a supraorbital approach for the resection of an OGM. The mean tumor volume was 54.6 cm3 (range, 17-94.2 cm3). Literature-reported rates of GTR (0.6) and CSF leak (0.3) with EEA were applied to our economic analysis. Supraorbital craniotomy was the preferred strategy, with an expected value of $29,423, compared with an EEA cost of $83,838. On multiple 1-way sensitivity analyses, supraorbital craniotomy remained the preferred strategy, with a minimum cost savings of $46,000 and a maximum savings of $64,000. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis found the lowest cost difference between the 2 surgical options to be $37,431. CONCLUSION: Compared with EEA, supraorbital craniotomy provides substantial cost savings in the treatment of OGMs. Given the potential differences in effectiveness between approaches, a cost-effectiveness analysis should be undertaken.