Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42543193›Full record

SynthesisClinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery2026

Cost-Effectiveness of Radiofrequency Ablation for Benign Non-Functioning Thyroid Nodules: A Systematic Review.

Sam P J van Dijk, Matthew M K Blanco, Ali Akhavan, Jessica Liu McMullin, G Scott Gazelle, Mohammad S Jalali, Jagpreet Chhatwal, Yinin Hu, Tessa M van Ginhoven, Rajshri M Gartland and 1 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Sam P J van DijkDepartment of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Academic Center for Thyroid Disease, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4745-7978
Matthew M K BlancoDepartment of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Ali AkhavanDepartment of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7077-3442
Jessica Liu McMullinDepartment of Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6492-4953
G Scott GazelleDepartment of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Mohammad S JalaliSloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6769-2732
Jagpreet ChhatwalMGH Institute for Technology Assessment, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8741-4430
Yinin HuDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Maryland Baltimore, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4324-9530
Tessa M van GinhovenDepartment of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Academic Center for Thyroid Disease, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9365-4892
Rajshri M GartlandDepartment of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Carrie CunninghamDepartment of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis systematic review tests the hypothesis that radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for benign non-functioning thyroid nodules is associated with favourable cost-effectiveness compared with surgery. MATERIALS AND

methodsA systematic literature search of multiple databases (Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central) was conducted through 16 May 2025, with no restrictions on publication date or language. Full economic evaluations comparing RFA with alternative management strategies were included in the primary synthesis. Secondary narrative synthesis included studies reporting cost data without formal cost-effectiveness modelling. All costs were converted to 2021 US dollars to enable cross-study comparability. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), net monetary benefit (NMB), and net health benefit (NHB) were calculated where data allowed.

resultsThirteen studies met the inclusion criteria: 3 full economic evaluations and 10 descriptive cost studies. All compared RFA to surgery. In the primary synthesis, two studies reported ICERs for RFA versus surgery, which ranged from -$14 994 (reflecting a lower cost and greater effectiveness for RFA) to $98 858 per QALY gained, with substantial variation in model design and assumptions. Post hoc estimates of NMB and NHB generally favoured RFA at $50 000 and $100 000 willingness-to-pay thresholds. In the narrative synthesis, 8 of 10 studies reported lower total costs for RFA (median: $2499) compared to surgery (median: $3579). Methodological heterogeneity limited comparability. Overall certainty of economic evidence was rated as low.

conclusionRFA may be a cost-effective alternative to surgery for benign thyroid nodules, but current economic evidence is limited and of low certainty.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisCost-Effectiveness AnalysisRadiofrequency AblationThyroid NoduleHumansbenign thyroid nodulescost‐effectivenessradiofrequency ablation

Identifiers

PMID42543193
PMCPMC13631809

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.