European journal of medical research · 2019
Cost effectiveness of bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Schrauder Michael G, Brunel-Geuder Lisa, Häberle Lothar, Wunderle Marius, Hoyer Juliane, Csorba Roland, Reis André, Schulz-Wendtland Rüdiger, Beckmann Matthias W, Lux Michael P
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Growing demand for risk-reducing surgery in individuals with inherited susceptibility to cancer leads to the question whether these procedures are cost effective for the executing hospitals. This study compared the clinical costs for bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy (BRRM) with and without different types of reconstruction, risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO), and their combinations with corresponding reimbursements in the statutory health-care system in Germany.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Real total costs of care for BRRM with and without reconstruction, RRSO, and their combinations were calculated as the sum of all personnel and technical costs. These costs calculated in a German University hospital were compared with the sum of all reimbursements in the German DRG-based health-care system.
RESULTS: While sole RRSO, BRRM without reconstruction, and BRRM with secondary DIEP (deep inferior epigastric perforator)-reconstruction still result in a small benefit, we even found shortfalls for the hospital with all other prophylactic operations under consideration. The calculated deficits were especially high for BRRM with implant-based breast reconstruction and for combined operations when the risk reduction is achieved with a minimum of separate operations.
CONCLUSIONS: Risk-reducing surgery in BRCA-mutation carriers is frequently not cost-covering for the executing hospitals in the German health-care system. Thus, appropriate concepts are required to ensure a nationwide care.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Real total costs of care for BRRM with and without reconstruction, RRSO, and their combinations were calculated as the sum of all personnel and technical costs. These costs calculated in a German University hospital were compared with the sum of all reimbursements in the German DRG-based health-care system.
RESULTS: While sole RRSO, BRRM without reconstruction, and BRRM with secondary DIEP (deep inferior epigastric perforator)-reconstruction still result in a small benefit, we even found shortfalls for the hospital with all other prophylactic operations under consideration. The calculated deficits were especially high for BRRM with implant-based breast reconstruction and for combined operations when the risk reduction is achieved with a minimum of separate operations.
CONCLUSIONS: Risk-reducing surgery in BRCA-mutation carriers is frequently not cost-covering for the executing hospitals in the German health-care system. Thus, appropriate concepts are required to ensure a nationwide care.