Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35638084›Full record

ArticleEuropean urology open science2022

Cost Effectiveness of the Use of Prophylactic Mesh To Prevent Parastomal Hernia After Urinary Diversion with an Ileal Conduit.

Sanjib Saha, Ulf Gerdtham, Mats Bläckberg, Petter Kollberg, Fredrik Liedberg

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European urology open science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sanjib SahaHealth Economics Unit, Department of Clinical Sciences (Malmö), Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Ulf GerdthamHealth Economics Unit, Department of Clinical Sciences (Malmö), Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Mats BläckbergDepartment of Urology, Helsingborg County Hospital, Helsingborg, Sweden.
Petter KollbergDepartment of Urology, Helsingborg County Hospital, Helsingborg, Sweden.
Fredrik LiedbergInstitute of Translational Medicine, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
Lund University · SEHelsingborgs lasarett · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Prophylactic lightweight mesh in the sublay position reduced the cumulative incidence of parastomal hernia (PSH) after cystectomy with ileal conduit diversion in a randomised controlled trial. Objective: To investigate whether the use of prophylactic mesh is cost-effective in comparison to no mesh from the health care provider perspective. Design setting and participants: Data on health care resource utilisation (outpatient care and inpatient care) were obtained for 159 patients included in a randomised trial. The patients underwent surgery at Skåne University Hospital or Helsingborg County Hospital (80 with a prophylactic mesh and 79 without) and information about care was ascertained from the regional health care register. The patients underwent surgery between 2012 and 2017 and were followed until death or August 2020. Outcome measurements and statistical analyses: The primary outcome measure was the clinical incidence of PSH. Costs are reported in Euro in 2020 prices (€1 = 10.486 Swedish Krona) and presented as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) with confidence intervals (CIs) calculated using a nonparametric bootstrap procedure. Sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses were performed to capture the uncertainty for ICERs. Results and limitations: The mean difference in total costs between the mesh and no-mesh groups was -€2047 (95% CI -€16 441 to €12 348). Seventeen patients (21.5%) in the no-mesh group developed clinical PSH versus six patients (7.5%) in the mesh group ( Conclusions: The use of prophylactic mesh during ileal conduit reconstruction to prevent PSH is cost-effective from the health care provider perspective. Patient summary: In patients having their bladder surgically removed, a mesh implant can be inserted when a portion of the intestine is used to create an opening to drain urine from the body. Our results show that mesh use to prevent development of a hernia at the opening where urine exits the body is cost-effective from the perspective of health care providers.

Indexed as

Bladder cancerCost-effectiveness analysisCystectomyEconomic evaluationIleal conduitMeshParastomal hernia

Identifiers

PMID35638084
PMCPMC9142740
OpenAlexW4224285898

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.