-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in the evaluation of incidental focal liver lesions: A cost-effectiveness analysis
M. Smajerova, H. Petrasova, J. Little, P. Ovesna, T. Andrasina, V. Valek, E. Nemcova, B. Miklosova,
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
NLK
Free Medical Journals
od 1998
Freely Accessible Science Journals
od 1998
PubMed Central
od 1997
Europe PubMed Central
od 1997
PubMed
27784973
DOI
10.3748/wjg.v22.i38.8605
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- MeSH
- analýza nákladů a výnosů MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- játra diagnostické zobrazování MeSH
- kontrastní látky chemie MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- magnetická rezonanční tomografie ekonomika MeSH
- mladý dospělý MeSH
- nádory jater diagnostické zobrazování ekonomika MeSH
- počítačová rentgenová tomografie ekonomika MeSH
- prospektivní studie MeSH
- senioři nad 80 let MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ultrasonografie ekonomika MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladý dospělý MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- senioři nad 80 let MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- Geografické názvy
- Česká republika MeSH
AIM: To determine whether contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) as the first-line method is more cost-effective in evaluating incidentally discovered focal liver lesions (FLLs) than is computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: Between 2010 and 2015, our prospective study enrolled 459 patients with incidentally found FLLs. The biological nature of FLLs was assessed by CEUS in all patients. CT or MRI examinations were added in unclear cases. The sensitivity and specificity of CEUS were calculated. The total costs of CEUS examinations and of the added examinations performed in inconclusive cases were calculated. Afterwards, the theoretical expenses for evaluating incidentally discovered FLLs using CT or MRI as the first-line method were calculated. The results were compared. RESULTS: The total cost of the diagnostic process using CEUS for all enrolled patients with FLLs was 75884 USD. When the expenses for additional CT and MRI examinations performed in inconclusive cases were added, the total cost was 90540 US dollar (USD). If all patients had been examined by CT or MR as the first-line method, the costs would have been 78897 USD or 384235 USD, respectively. The difference between the cost of CT and CEUS was 3013 USD (4%) and that between MRI and CEUS was 308352 USD (406.3%). We correctly described 97.06% of benign or malignant lesions, with 96.99% sensitivity and 97.09% specificity. Positive predictive value was 94.16% and negative predictive value was 98.52%. In cases with 4 and more lesions, malignancy is significantly more frequent and inconclusive findings significantly less frequent (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: While the costs of CEUS and CT in evaluating FLLs are comparable, CEUS examination is far more cost-effective in comparison to MRI.
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc17023577
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20170830094208.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 170720s2016 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.3748/wjg.v22.i38.8605 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)27784973
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Smajerova, Miriama $u Miriama Smajerova, Hana Petrasova, Jirina Little, Tomas Andrasina, Vlastimil Valek, Eva Nemcova, Barbora Miklosova, Department of Radiology, University Hospital Brno, 62500 Brno, Czech Republic.
- 245 10
- $a Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in the evaluation of incidental focal liver lesions: A cost-effectiveness analysis / $c M. Smajerova, H. Petrasova, J. Little, P. Ovesna, T. Andrasina, V. Valek, E. Nemcova, B. Miklosova,
- 520 9_
- $a AIM: To determine whether contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) as the first-line method is more cost-effective in evaluating incidentally discovered focal liver lesions (FLLs) than is computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: Between 2010 and 2015, our prospective study enrolled 459 patients with incidentally found FLLs. The biological nature of FLLs was assessed by CEUS in all patients. CT or MRI examinations were added in unclear cases. The sensitivity and specificity of CEUS were calculated. The total costs of CEUS examinations and of the added examinations performed in inconclusive cases were calculated. Afterwards, the theoretical expenses for evaluating incidentally discovered FLLs using CT or MRI as the first-line method were calculated. The results were compared. RESULTS: The total cost of the diagnostic process using CEUS for all enrolled patients with FLLs was 75884 USD. When the expenses for additional CT and MRI examinations performed in inconclusive cases were added, the total cost was 90540 US dollar (USD). If all patients had been examined by CT or MR as the first-line method, the costs would have been 78897 USD or 384235 USD, respectively. The difference between the cost of CT and CEUS was 3013 USD (4%) and that between MRI and CEUS was 308352 USD (406.3%). We correctly described 97.06% of benign or malignant lesions, with 96.99% sensitivity and 97.09% specificity. Positive predictive value was 94.16% and negative predictive value was 98.52%. In cases with 4 and more lesions, malignancy is significantly more frequent and inconclusive findings significantly less frequent (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: While the costs of CEUS and CT in evaluating FLLs are comparable, CEUS examination is far more cost-effective in comparison to MRI.
- 650 _2
- $a dospělí $7 D000328
- 650 _2
- $a senioři $7 D000368
- 650 _2
- $a senioři nad 80 let $7 D000369
- 650 _2
- $a kontrastní látky $x chemie $7 D003287
- 650 _2
- $a analýza nákladů a výnosů $7 D003362
- 650 _2
- $a Česká republika $7 D018153
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a játra $x diagnostické zobrazování $7 D008099
- 650 _2
- $a nádory jater $x diagnostické zobrazování $x ekonomika $7 D008113
- 650 _2
- $a magnetická rezonanční tomografie $x ekonomika $7 D008279
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
- 650 _2
- $a prospektivní studie $7 D011446
- 650 _2
- $a počítačová rentgenová tomografie $x ekonomika $7 D014057
- 650 _2
- $a ultrasonografie $x ekonomika $7 D014463
- 650 _2
- $a mladý dospělý $7 D055815
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Petrasova, Hana $u Miriama Smajerova, Hana Petrasova, Jirina Little, Tomas Andrasina, Vlastimil Valek, Eva Nemcova, Barbora Miklosova, Department of Radiology, University Hospital Brno, 62500 Brno, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Little, Jirina $u Miriama Smajerova, Hana Petrasova, Jirina Little, Tomas Andrasina, Vlastimil Valek, Eva Nemcova, Barbora Miklosova, Department of Radiology, University Hospital Brno, 62500 Brno, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Ovesna, Petra $u Miriama Smajerova, Hana Petrasova, Jirina Little, Tomas Andrasina, Vlastimil Valek, Eva Nemcova, Barbora Miklosova, Department of Radiology, University Hospital Brno, 62500 Brno, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Andrasina, Tomas $u Miriama Smajerova, Hana Petrasova, Jirina Little, Tomas Andrasina, Vlastimil Valek, Eva Nemcova, Barbora Miklosova, Department of Radiology, University Hospital Brno, 62500 Brno, Czech Republic. $7 gn_A_00006303
- 700 1_
- $a Valek, Vlastimil $u Miriama Smajerova, Hana Petrasova, Jirina Little, Tomas Andrasina, Vlastimil Valek, Eva Nemcova, Barbora Miklosova, Department of Radiology, University Hospital Brno, 62500 Brno, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Nemcova, Eva $u Miriama Smajerova, Hana Petrasova, Jirina Little, Tomas Andrasina, Vlastimil Valek, Eva Nemcova, Barbora Miklosova, Department of Radiology, University Hospital Brno, 62500 Brno, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Miklosova, Barbora $u Miriama Smajerova, Hana Petrasova, Jirina Little, Tomas Andrasina, Vlastimil Valek, Eva Nemcova, Barbora Miklosova, Department of Radiology, University Hospital Brno, 62500 Brno, Czech Republic.
- 773 0_
- $w MED00006918 $t World journal of gastroenterology $x 2219-2840 $g Roč. 22, č. 38 (2016), s. 8605-8614
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27784973 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20170720 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20170830094756 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1239258 $s 984490
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2016 $b 22 $c 38 $d 8605-8614 $i 2219-2840 $m World journal of gastroenterology $n World J Gastroenterol $x MED00006918
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20170720