A comparison of costs associated with endoscope-assisted craniectomy versus open cranial vault repair for infants with sagittal synostosis: Clinical article

Timothy W. Vogel, Albert S. Woo, Alex A. Kane, Kamlesh B. Patel, Sybill D. Naidoo, Matthew D. Smyth

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

39 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Object. The surgical management of infants with sagittal synostosis has traditionally relied on open cranial vault remodeling (CVR) techniques; however, minimally invasive technologies, including endoscope-assisted craniectomy (EAC) repair followed by helmet therapy (HT, EAC+HT), is increasingly used to treat various forms of craniosynostosis during the 1st year of life. In this study the authors determined the costs associated with EAC+HT in comparison with those for CVR. Methods. The authors performed a retrospective case-control analysis of 21 children who had undergone CVR and 21 who had undergone EAC+HT. Eligibility criteria included an age less than 1 year and at least 1 year of clinical follow-up data. Financial and clinical records were reviewed for data related to length of hospital stay and transfusion rates as well as costs associated with physician, hospital, and outpatient clinic visits. Results. The average age of patients who underwent CVR was 6.8 months compared with 3.1 months for those who underwent EAC+HT. Patients who underwent EAC+HT most often required the use of 2 helmets (76.5%), infrequently required a third helmet (13.3%), and averaged 1.8 clinic visits in the first 90 days after surgery. Endoscope-assisted craniectomy plus HT was associated with shorter hospital stays (mean 1.10 vs 4.67 days for CVR, p < 0.0001), a decreased rate of blood transfusions (9.5% vs 100% for CVR, p < 0.0001), and a decreased operative time (81.1 vs 165.8 minutes for CVR, p < 0.0001). The overall cost of EAC+HT, accounting for hospital charges, professional and helmet fees, and clinic visits, was also lower than that of CVR ($37,255.99 vs $56,990.46, respectively, p < 0.0001). Conclusions. Endoscope-assisted craniectomy plus HT is a less costly surgical option for patients than CVR. In addition, EAC+HT was associated with a lower utilization of perioperative resources. Theses findings suggest that EAC+HT for infants with sagittal synostosis may be a cost-effective first-line surgical option.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)324-331
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics
Volume13
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Craniosynostoses
Endoscopes
Costs and Cost Analysis
Head Protective Devices
Ambulatory Care
Length of Stay
Hospital Outpatient Clinics
Hospital Charges
Fees and Charges
Operative Time
Ambulatory Surgical Procedures
Blood Transfusion

Keywords

  • Cost analysis
  • Craniofacial
  • Endoscope
  • Helmet therapy
  • Sagittal synostosis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Surgery
  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health

Cite this

A comparison of costs associated with endoscope-assisted craniectomy versus open cranial vault repair for infants with sagittal synostosis : Clinical article. / Vogel, Timothy W.; Woo, Albert S.; Kane, Alex A.; Patel, Kamlesh B.; Naidoo, Sybill D.; Smyth, Matthew D.

In: Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics, Vol. 13, No. 3, 2014, p. 324-331.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Vogel, Timothy W. ; Woo, Albert S. ; Kane, Alex A. ; Patel, Kamlesh B. ; Naidoo, Sybill D. ; Smyth, Matthew D. / A comparison of costs associated with endoscope-assisted craniectomy versus open cranial vault repair for infants with sagittal synostosis : Clinical article. In: Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics. 2014 ; Vol. 13, No. 3. pp. 324-331.
@article{8f689bcc69b44f4b9310b5a1a4f11fd2,
title = "A comparison of costs associated with endoscope-assisted craniectomy versus open cranial vault repair for infants with sagittal synostosis: Clinical article",
abstract = "Object. The surgical management of infants with sagittal synostosis has traditionally relied on open cranial vault remodeling (CVR) techniques; however, minimally invasive technologies, including endoscope-assisted craniectomy (EAC) repair followed by helmet therapy (HT, EAC+HT), is increasingly used to treat various forms of craniosynostosis during the 1st year of life. In this study the authors determined the costs associated with EAC+HT in comparison with those for CVR. Methods. The authors performed a retrospective case-control analysis of 21 children who had undergone CVR and 21 who had undergone EAC+HT. Eligibility criteria included an age less than 1 year and at least 1 year of clinical follow-up data. Financial and clinical records were reviewed for data related to length of hospital stay and transfusion rates as well as costs associated with physician, hospital, and outpatient clinic visits. Results. The average age of patients who underwent CVR was 6.8 months compared with 3.1 months for those who underwent EAC+HT. Patients who underwent EAC+HT most often required the use of 2 helmets (76.5{\%}), infrequently required a third helmet (13.3{\%}), and averaged 1.8 clinic visits in the first 90 days after surgery. Endoscope-assisted craniectomy plus HT was associated with shorter hospital stays (mean 1.10 vs 4.67 days for CVR, p < 0.0001), a decreased rate of blood transfusions (9.5{\%} vs 100{\%} for CVR, p < 0.0001), and a decreased operative time (81.1 vs 165.8 minutes for CVR, p < 0.0001). The overall cost of EAC+HT, accounting for hospital charges, professional and helmet fees, and clinic visits, was also lower than that of CVR ($37,255.99 vs $56,990.46, respectively, p < 0.0001). Conclusions. Endoscope-assisted craniectomy plus HT is a less costly surgical option for patients than CVR. In addition, EAC+HT was associated with a lower utilization of perioperative resources. Theses findings suggest that EAC+HT for infants with sagittal synostosis may be a cost-effective first-line surgical option.",
keywords = "Cost analysis, Craniofacial, Endoscope, Helmet therapy, Sagittal synostosis",
author = "Vogel, {Timothy W.} and Woo, {Albert S.} and Kane, {Alex A.} and Patel, {Kamlesh B.} and Naidoo, {Sybill D.} and Smyth, {Matthew D.}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.3171/2013.12.PEDS13320",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "324--331",
journal = "Journal of neurosurgery. Pediatrics",
issn = "1933-0707",
publisher = "American Association of Neurological Surgeons",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of costs associated with endoscope-assisted craniectomy versus open cranial vault repair for infants with sagittal synostosis

T2 - Clinical article

AU - Vogel, Timothy W.

AU - Woo, Albert S.

AU - Kane, Alex A.

AU - Patel, Kamlesh B.

AU - Naidoo, Sybill D.

AU - Smyth, Matthew D.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Object. The surgical management of infants with sagittal synostosis has traditionally relied on open cranial vault remodeling (CVR) techniques; however, minimally invasive technologies, including endoscope-assisted craniectomy (EAC) repair followed by helmet therapy (HT, EAC+HT), is increasingly used to treat various forms of craniosynostosis during the 1st year of life. In this study the authors determined the costs associated with EAC+HT in comparison with those for CVR. Methods. The authors performed a retrospective case-control analysis of 21 children who had undergone CVR and 21 who had undergone EAC+HT. Eligibility criteria included an age less than 1 year and at least 1 year of clinical follow-up data. Financial and clinical records were reviewed for data related to length of hospital stay and transfusion rates as well as costs associated with physician, hospital, and outpatient clinic visits. Results. The average age of patients who underwent CVR was 6.8 months compared with 3.1 months for those who underwent EAC+HT. Patients who underwent EAC+HT most often required the use of 2 helmets (76.5%), infrequently required a third helmet (13.3%), and averaged 1.8 clinic visits in the first 90 days after surgery. Endoscope-assisted craniectomy plus HT was associated with shorter hospital stays (mean 1.10 vs 4.67 days for CVR, p < 0.0001), a decreased rate of blood transfusions (9.5% vs 100% for CVR, p < 0.0001), and a decreased operative time (81.1 vs 165.8 minutes for CVR, p < 0.0001). The overall cost of EAC+HT, accounting for hospital charges, professional and helmet fees, and clinic visits, was also lower than that of CVR ($37,255.99 vs $56,990.46, respectively, p < 0.0001). Conclusions. Endoscope-assisted craniectomy plus HT is a less costly surgical option for patients than CVR. In addition, EAC+HT was associated with a lower utilization of perioperative resources. Theses findings suggest that EAC+HT for infants with sagittal synostosis may be a cost-effective first-line surgical option.

AB - Object. The surgical management of infants with sagittal synostosis has traditionally relied on open cranial vault remodeling (CVR) techniques; however, minimally invasive technologies, including endoscope-assisted craniectomy (EAC) repair followed by helmet therapy (HT, EAC+HT), is increasingly used to treat various forms of craniosynostosis during the 1st year of life. In this study the authors determined the costs associated with EAC+HT in comparison with those for CVR. Methods. The authors performed a retrospective case-control analysis of 21 children who had undergone CVR and 21 who had undergone EAC+HT. Eligibility criteria included an age less than 1 year and at least 1 year of clinical follow-up data. Financial and clinical records were reviewed for data related to length of hospital stay and transfusion rates as well as costs associated with physician, hospital, and outpatient clinic visits. Results. The average age of patients who underwent CVR was 6.8 months compared with 3.1 months for those who underwent EAC+HT. Patients who underwent EAC+HT most often required the use of 2 helmets (76.5%), infrequently required a third helmet (13.3%), and averaged 1.8 clinic visits in the first 90 days after surgery. Endoscope-assisted craniectomy plus HT was associated with shorter hospital stays (mean 1.10 vs 4.67 days for CVR, p < 0.0001), a decreased rate of blood transfusions (9.5% vs 100% for CVR, p < 0.0001), and a decreased operative time (81.1 vs 165.8 minutes for CVR, p < 0.0001). The overall cost of EAC+HT, accounting for hospital charges, professional and helmet fees, and clinic visits, was also lower than that of CVR ($37,255.99 vs $56,990.46, respectively, p < 0.0001). Conclusions. Endoscope-assisted craniectomy plus HT is a less costly surgical option for patients than CVR. In addition, EAC+HT was associated with a lower utilization of perioperative resources. Theses findings suggest that EAC+HT for infants with sagittal synostosis may be a cost-effective first-line surgical option.

KW - Cost analysis

KW - Craniofacial

KW - Endoscope

KW - Helmet therapy

KW - Sagittal synostosis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84895447154&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84895447154&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3171/2013.12.PEDS13320

DO - 10.3171/2013.12.PEDS13320

M3 - Article

C2 - 24410127

AN - SCOPUS:84895447154

VL - 13

SP - 324

EP - 331

JO - Journal of neurosurgery. Pediatrics

JF - Journal of neurosurgery. Pediatrics

SN - 1933-0707

IS - 3

ER -