Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29159426›Full record

ArticleChild's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery2018

An initial cost-effectiveness analysis of intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (iMRI) in pediatric epilepsy surgery.

Matthew F Sacino, Sean S Huang, Robert F Keating, William D Gaillard, Chima O Oluigbo

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Quality and patient safety research in pediatric neurosurgery: a review.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2023
    Review
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Matthew F SacinoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Children's National Medical Center, 111 Michigan Avenue NW, Washington, DC, USA.
Sean S HuangDepartment of Health Systems Administration, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.
Robert F KeatingDepartment of Neurosurgery, Children's National Medical Center, 111 Michigan Avenue NW, Washington, DC, USA.
William D GaillardDepartment of Neurology, Children's National Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA.
Chima O OluigboDepartment of Neurosurgery, Children's National Medical Center, 111 Michigan Avenue NW, Washington, DC, USA. coluigbo@cnmc.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePrevious studies have illustrated the clinical utility of the addition of intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (iMRI) to conventional microsurgical resection. While iMRI requires initial capital cost investment, long-term reduction in costly follow-up management and reoperation costs may prove economically efficacious. The objective of this study is to investigate the cost-effectiveness of the addition of iMRI utilization versus conventional microsurgical techniques in focal cortical dysplasia (FCD) resection in pediatric patients with medically refractory epilepsy.

methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical records of pediatric subjects who underwent surgical resection of FCD at the Children's National Health System between March 2005 and April 2015. Patients were assigned to one of three cohorts: iMRI-assisted resection, conventional resection with iMRI-assisted reoperation, or conventional resection. Direct costs included preoperative, operative, postoperative, long-term follow-up, and antiepileptic drug (AED) costs. The cost-effectiveness was calculated as the sum total of all direct medical costs over the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). We also performed sensitivity analysis on numerous variables to assess the validity of our results.

resultsFifty-six consecutive pediatric patients underwent resective surgery for medically intractable FCD. Ten patients underwent iMRI-assisted resection; 7 underwent conventional resection followed by iMRI-assisted reoperation; 39 patients underwent conventional microsurgical resection. Taken over the lifetime of the patient, the cumulative discounted QALY of patients in the iMRI-assisted resection cohort was about 2.91 years, versus 2.61 years in the conventional resection with iMRI-assisted reoperation cohort, and 1.76 years for the conventional resection cohort. Adjusting for inflation, iMRI-assisted surgeries have a cost-effectiveness ratio of $16,179 per QALY, versus $28,514 per QALY for the conventional resection with iMRI-assisted reoperation cohort, and $49,960 per QALY for the conventional resection cohort. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that no one single variable significantly altered cost-effectiveness across all three cohorts compared to the baseline results.

conclusionThe addition of iMRI to conventional microsurgical techniques for resection of FCD in pediatric patients with intractable epilepsy resulted in increased seizure freedom and reduction in long-term direct medical costs compared to conventional surgeries. Our data suggests that iMRI may be a cost-effective addition to the surgical armamentarium for epilepsy surgery.

Indexed as

ChildChild, PreschoolCohort StudiesCost-Benefit AnalysisDrug Resistant EpilepsyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIntraoperative Neurophysiological MonitoringMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleNeurosurgical ProceduresRetrospective StudiesCost-effectivenessEpilepsy surgeryFocal cortical dysplasiaIntraoperative magnetic resonance imagingPediatric

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.