Ophthalmology. Retina · 2023
A Population-Based Analysis of Long-Term Costs and Adverse Events after Pneumatic Retinopexy and Pars Plana Vitrectomy.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Popovic Marko M, Muni Rajeev H, Kertes Peter J, Thiruchelvam Deva, Chaban Yuri V, Qian Jenny, Hillier Roxane, Redelmeier Donald A
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To comprehensively examine the cost effectiveness, reattachment rate, and complications of pneumatic retinopexy (PnR) compared with pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) within a universal health care system.
DESIGN: Population-based, multicenter, consecutive, retrospective longitudinal cohort analysis.
SUBJECTS: We identified consecutive adults aged ≥ 50 years requiring surgery for primary RRD over a 20-year interval between April 1, 2002, and March 31, 2022. Initial surgery was considered the index date for analyses.
INTERVENTION: Pneumatic retinopexy was compared with PPV in all analyses.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary analysis investigated the mean annualized health care costs comparing PnR to PPV over the 2 years after initial surgery. Secondary analyses examined the primary reattachment rate and complications.
RESULTS: In total, 25 665 eligible patients were identified, with 8794 undergoing PnR and 16 871 undergoing PPV. The mean patient age was 65 years and 39% were women. The mean annualized cost after PnR was $8924 and $11 937 after PPV (mean difference, $3013; 95% confidence interval, $2533-$3493; P < 0.001). The primary reattachment rate at 90 days after PnR was 83% and after PPV was 93% (P < 0.001). The risk of cataract or glaucoma surgery was lower after PnR, and the frequency of ophthalmology clinic visits, intravitreal injections, and anxiety was higher after PnR. Hospitalizations and long-term disability were less frequent after PnR.
CONCLUSIONS: Pneumatic retinopexy, when compared with PPV, was associated with lower long-term health care costs. Pneumatic retinopexy appeared to be effective, safe, and inexpensive, thus offering a viable option for improving access to RRD repair in appropriately selected cases.
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
DESIGN: Population-based, multicenter, consecutive, retrospective longitudinal cohort analysis.
SUBJECTS: We identified consecutive adults aged ≥ 50 years requiring surgery for primary RRD over a 20-year interval between April 1, 2002, and March 31, 2022. Initial surgery was considered the index date for analyses.
INTERVENTION: Pneumatic retinopexy was compared with PPV in all analyses.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary analysis investigated the mean annualized health care costs comparing PnR to PPV over the 2 years after initial surgery. Secondary analyses examined the primary reattachment rate and complications.
RESULTS: In total, 25 665 eligible patients were identified, with 8794 undergoing PnR and 16 871 undergoing PPV. The mean patient age was 65 years and 39% were women. The mean annualized cost after PnR was $8924 and $11 937 after PPV (mean difference, $3013; 95% confidence interval, $2533-$3493; P < 0.001). The primary reattachment rate at 90 days after PnR was 83% and after PPV was 93% (P < 0.001). The risk of cataract or glaucoma surgery was lower after PnR, and the frequency of ophthalmology clinic visits, intravitreal injections, and anxiety was higher after PnR. Hospitalizations and long-term disability were less frequent after PnR.
CONCLUSIONS: Pneumatic retinopexy, when compared with PPV, was associated with lower long-term health care costs. Pneumatic retinopexy appeared to be effective, safe, and inexpensive, thus offering a viable option for improving access to RRD repair in appropriately selected cases.
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.