Preablation Diagnostic Whole-Body Scan vs Empiric Radioactive Iodine Ablation in Differentiated Thyroid Cancer: Cost-effectiveness Analysis

Pre-Treatment and Post-Treatment I-131 Imaging in Differentiated Thyroid Carcinoma

Radioiodine imaging in initial perioperative settings, after the total thyroidectomy, includes pre-treatment and post-treatment radioiodine imaging. While the benefit of post-treatment whole-body imaging (PT-WBI) is well established, the role of diagnostic whole-body imaging (dx WBI), prior to radioiodine (I-131) ablative or therapeutic doses, is controversial. Dx WBI has been abandoned in most nuclear medicine centers long ago. Planar low-dose dxWBI provides the volume of postoperative thyroid remnants, but it cannot detect occult metastatic foci in the neck. The modern integrated multimodality, i.e., SPECT/CT imaging, provides three dimensional images and accurate anatomic/metabolic data. This hybrid technology offers better spatial resolution but not better sensitivity. Dx WBI has low theranostic power because of the radioiodine indifference and low detection sensitivity for small-volume nodal disease in the neck. Since dx WBI cannot clarify the paratracheal cervical uptake, thyroid remnants may be easily misinterpreted as nodal disease, leading to a false N upstaging (from N0 stage to N1 stage) in DTC patients. Post-ablation I-131 imaging has a significant role in the initial staging of radioiodine-avid DTC and in the identification of non-radioiodine avid tumors. Additionally, SPECT/CT in the post-treatment setting provides more accurate initial TNM staging and better risk stratification of DTC patients. Post-treatment I-131 imaging is obligatory and must be performed in all DTC patients who receive radioiodine treatment.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of infected necrotizing pancreatitis management in an academic setting

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Traditional management for infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) often utilizes open necrosectomy, which carries high morbidity and complication rates. Thus, minimally invasive strategies have gained favor, specifically step-up approaches utilizing endoscopic or minimally-invasive surgery (MIS); however, the ideal management modality for INP has not been identified.

METHODS

A decision tree model was designed to analyze costs and survival associated with open necrosectomy, endoscopic step-up, and MIS step-up protocols for management of INP after 4 weeks of necrosis development with adequate retroperitoneal access. Costs were based on a third-party payer perspective using Medicare reimbursement rates. The model's effectiveness was represented by quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Sensitivity analyses were performed to validate results.

RESULTS

Endoscopic step-up was the dominant economic strategy with 7.92 QALYs for $90,864.09. Surgical step-up resulted in a decrease of 0.09 QALYs and a cost increase of $10,067.89 while open necrosectomy resulted in a decrease of 0.4 QALYs and an increased cost of $18,407.52 over endoscopic step-up. In 100,000 random-sampling simulations, 65.5% of simulations favored endoscopic step-up. MIS step-up was favored when MIS acute mortality rates fell and when MIS drainage success rates rose.

CONCLUSIONS

In our simulated patients with INP, the most cost-effective management strategy is endoscopic step-up. Cost-effectiveness varies with changes in acute mortality and drainage success, which will depend on local expertise.