Hospital costs and cosmetic outcome of benign and high-risk breast lesions managed by vacuum-assisted excision versus surgical excision

Although vacuum-assisted excision (VAE) is a safe and effective alternative to surgical excision (SE), the latter is most commonly used for the management of benign and high-risk breast lesions. To evaluate the healthcare benefit of VAE, hospital costs and cosmetic outcome after VAE were compared to...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:British journal of radiology 2022-08, Vol.95 (1136), p.20220117
Hauptverfasser: van de Voort, Elles Mf, Struik, Gerson M, van Streun, Sophia P, Verhoef, Cornelis, Uyl-de Groot, Carin A, Klem, Taco Mal
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 1136
container_start_page 20220117
container_title British journal of radiology
container_volume 95
creator van de Voort, Elles Mf
Struik, Gerson M
van Streun, Sophia P
Verhoef, Cornelis
Uyl-de Groot, Carin A
Klem, Taco Mal
description Although vacuum-assisted excision (VAE) is a safe and effective alternative to surgical excision (SE), the latter is most commonly used for the management of benign and high-risk breast lesions. To evaluate the healthcare benefit of VAE, hospital costs and cosmetic outcome after VAE were compared to SE. Additionally, the impact of VAE implementation on hospital costs was investigated. This was a single-centre retrospective cohort study with two cohorts: "VAE" and "SE". All patients with a benign or high-risk lesion excised by VAE or SE from January 2016 up to December 2019 were included. Cosmetic outcome was measured with the BCTOS-cosmetic subscale, and hospital costs were presented as mean (SD) and median (IQR). During the study period, 258 patients with 295 excised lesions were included. The initial procedure was VAE in 102 patients and SE in 156 patients. Hospital costs after (median € 2324) were significantly lower than before (median € 3,144) implementation of VAE (mean difference € 1,004, < 0.001), most likely attributable to the lower costs for patients treated with VAE (mean difference € 1,979, < 0.001). Mean cosmetic outcome was comparable between VAE (median 1.35) and SE (median 1.44, = 0.802). Implementing VAE as an alternative treatment option for benign and high-risk breast lesions resulted in a large decrease in hospital costs but a cosmetic benefit of VAE could not be demonstrated in this retrospective study. Costs associated with the complete patient pathway were included and not only VAE was compared to SE but also the before cohort was compared to the after cohort to demonstrate the benefit of VAE implementation in clinical practice. Additionally, cosmetic outcome was compared between VAE and SE using patient reported outcome measures.
doi_str_mv 10.1259/bjr.20220117
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10162056</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2668222770</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c385t-5d307a54862a924ee15b201e229c3dc125a54d82af4e50d5d20439e4f785bcfd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkUFP3DAQha2qqGxpb5yRjz0Qajtx4pyqCpVSCakXkLhZjj3JGpJ48Tir8gv6t_EWFpWT7Xmf3sz4EXLM2RkXsv3a3cUzwYRgnDfvyIo3lSqUYrfvyYox1hRcKHlIPiLe7Z6yZR_IYSlrVjVCrsjfy4Abn8xIbcCE1Mxud5sgeUvDkmyYgIaedjD7Yf4nr_2wLqLHe9pFMJjoCOjDjHQysxnA0e6Rbo1dlqkwiB5TLsEf63cQ3ULEBSkucfA2d90Ln8hBb0aEzy_nEbm5-HF9fllc_f756_z7VWFLJVMhXckaIytVC9OKCoDLLm8OQrS2dDZ_SBadEqavQDInnWBV2ULVN0p2tnflEfn27LtZugmchTlFM-pN9JOJjzoYr98qs1_rIWw1Z7wWTNbZ4cuLQwwPC2DSk0cL42hmCAtqUddKCNE0LKOnz6iNATFC_9qHM70LT-fw9D68jJ_8P9srvE-rfALrVJlc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2668222770</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Hospital costs and cosmetic outcome of benign and high-risk breast lesions managed by vacuum-assisted excision versus surgical excision</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>van de Voort, Elles Mf ; Struik, Gerson M ; van Streun, Sophia P ; Verhoef, Cornelis ; Uyl-de Groot, Carin A ; Klem, Taco Mal</creator><creatorcontrib>van de Voort, Elles Mf ; Struik, Gerson M ; van Streun, Sophia P ; Verhoef, Cornelis ; Uyl-de Groot, Carin A ; Klem, Taco Mal</creatorcontrib><description>Although vacuum-assisted excision (VAE) is a safe and effective alternative to surgical excision (SE), the latter is most commonly used for the management of benign and high-risk breast lesions. To evaluate the healthcare benefit of VAE, hospital costs and cosmetic outcome after VAE were compared to SE. Additionally, the impact of VAE implementation on hospital costs was investigated. This was a single-centre retrospective cohort study with two cohorts: "VAE" and "SE". All patients with a benign or high-risk lesion excised by VAE or SE from January 2016 up to December 2019 were included. Cosmetic outcome was measured with the BCTOS-cosmetic subscale, and hospital costs were presented as mean (SD) and median (IQR). During the study period, 258 patients with 295 excised lesions were included. The initial procedure was VAE in 102 patients and SE in 156 patients. Hospital costs after (median € 2324) were significantly lower than before (median € 3,144) implementation of VAE (mean difference € 1,004, &lt; 0.001), most likely attributable to the lower costs for patients treated with VAE (mean difference € 1,979, &lt; 0.001). Mean cosmetic outcome was comparable between VAE (median 1.35) and SE (median 1.44, = 0.802). Implementing VAE as an alternative treatment option for benign and high-risk breast lesions resulted in a large decrease in hospital costs but a cosmetic benefit of VAE could not be demonstrated in this retrospective study. Costs associated with the complete patient pathway were included and not only VAE was compared to SE but also the before cohort was compared to the after cohort to demonstrate the benefit of VAE implementation in clinical practice. Additionally, cosmetic outcome was compared between VAE and SE using patient reported outcome measures.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-1285</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1748-880X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1748-880X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20220117</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35604725</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: The British Institute of Radiology</publisher><subject>Breast - pathology ; Breast Neoplasms - pathology ; Breast Neoplasms - surgery ; Female ; Hospital Costs ; Humans ; Patient Reported Outcome Measures ; Retrospective Studies ; Vacuum</subject><ispartof>British journal of radiology, 2022-08, Vol.95 (1136), p.20220117</ispartof><rights>2022 The Authors. Published by the British Institute of Radiology 2022 The Authors</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c385t-5d307a54862a924ee15b201e229c3dc125a54d82af4e50d5d20439e4f785bcfd3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c385t-5d307a54862a924ee15b201e229c3dc125a54d82af4e50d5d20439e4f785bcfd3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-2392-9763</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35604725$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>van de Voort, Elles Mf</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Struik, Gerson M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Streun, Sophia P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Verhoef, Cornelis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Uyl-de Groot, Carin A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Klem, Taco Mal</creatorcontrib><title>Hospital costs and cosmetic outcome of benign and high-risk breast lesions managed by vacuum-assisted excision versus surgical excision</title><title>British journal of radiology</title><addtitle>Br J Radiol</addtitle><description>Although vacuum-assisted excision (VAE) is a safe and effective alternative to surgical excision (SE), the latter is most commonly used for the management of benign and high-risk breast lesions. To evaluate the healthcare benefit of VAE, hospital costs and cosmetic outcome after VAE were compared to SE. Additionally, the impact of VAE implementation on hospital costs was investigated. This was a single-centre retrospective cohort study with two cohorts: "VAE" and "SE". All patients with a benign or high-risk lesion excised by VAE or SE from January 2016 up to December 2019 were included. Cosmetic outcome was measured with the BCTOS-cosmetic subscale, and hospital costs were presented as mean (SD) and median (IQR). During the study period, 258 patients with 295 excised lesions were included. The initial procedure was VAE in 102 patients and SE in 156 patients. Hospital costs after (median € 2324) were significantly lower than before (median € 3,144) implementation of VAE (mean difference € 1,004, &lt; 0.001), most likely attributable to the lower costs for patients treated with VAE (mean difference € 1,979, &lt; 0.001). Mean cosmetic outcome was comparable between VAE (median 1.35) and SE (median 1.44, = 0.802). Implementing VAE as an alternative treatment option for benign and high-risk breast lesions resulted in a large decrease in hospital costs but a cosmetic benefit of VAE could not be demonstrated in this retrospective study. Costs associated with the complete patient pathway were included and not only VAE was compared to SE but also the before cohort was compared to the after cohort to demonstrate the benefit of VAE implementation in clinical practice. Additionally, cosmetic outcome was compared between VAE and SE using patient reported outcome measures.</description><subject>Breast - pathology</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - pathology</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Hospital Costs</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Patient Reported Outcome Measures</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Vacuum</subject><issn>0007-1285</issn><issn>1748-880X</issn><issn>1748-880X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkUFP3DAQha2qqGxpb5yRjz0Qajtx4pyqCpVSCakXkLhZjj3JGpJ48Tir8gv6t_EWFpWT7Xmf3sz4EXLM2RkXsv3a3cUzwYRgnDfvyIo3lSqUYrfvyYox1hRcKHlIPiLe7Z6yZR_IYSlrVjVCrsjfy4Abn8xIbcCE1Mxud5sgeUvDkmyYgIaedjD7Yf4nr_2wLqLHe9pFMJjoCOjDjHQysxnA0e6Rbo1dlqkwiB5TLsEf63cQ3ULEBSkucfA2d90Ln8hBb0aEzy_nEbm5-HF9fllc_f756_z7VWFLJVMhXckaIytVC9OKCoDLLm8OQrS2dDZ_SBadEqavQDInnWBV2ULVN0p2tnflEfn27LtZugmchTlFM-pN9JOJjzoYr98qs1_rIWw1Z7wWTNbZ4cuLQwwPC2DSk0cL42hmCAtqUddKCNE0LKOnz6iNATFC_9qHM70LT-fw9D68jJ_8P9srvE-rfALrVJlc</recordid><startdate>20220801</startdate><enddate>20220801</enddate><creator>van de Voort, Elles Mf</creator><creator>Struik, Gerson M</creator><creator>van Streun, Sophia P</creator><creator>Verhoef, Cornelis</creator><creator>Uyl-de Groot, Carin A</creator><creator>Klem, Taco Mal</creator><general>The British Institute of Radiology</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2392-9763</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220801</creationdate><title>Hospital costs and cosmetic outcome of benign and high-risk breast lesions managed by vacuum-assisted excision versus surgical excision</title><author>van de Voort, Elles Mf ; Struik, Gerson M ; van Streun, Sophia P ; Verhoef, Cornelis ; Uyl-de Groot, Carin A ; Klem, Taco Mal</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c385t-5d307a54862a924ee15b201e229c3dc125a54d82af4e50d5d20439e4f785bcfd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Breast - pathology</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - pathology</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Hospital Costs</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Patient Reported Outcome Measures</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Vacuum</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>van de Voort, Elles Mf</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Struik, Gerson M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Streun, Sophia P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Verhoef, Cornelis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Uyl-de Groot, Carin A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Klem, Taco Mal</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>British journal of radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>van de Voort, Elles Mf</au><au>Struik, Gerson M</au><au>van Streun, Sophia P</au><au>Verhoef, Cornelis</au><au>Uyl-de Groot, Carin A</au><au>Klem, Taco Mal</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Hospital costs and cosmetic outcome of benign and high-risk breast lesions managed by vacuum-assisted excision versus surgical excision</atitle><jtitle>British journal of radiology</jtitle><addtitle>Br J Radiol</addtitle><date>2022-08-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>95</volume><issue>1136</issue><spage>20220117</spage><pages>20220117-</pages><issn>0007-1285</issn><issn>1748-880X</issn><eissn>1748-880X</eissn><abstract>Although vacuum-assisted excision (VAE) is a safe and effective alternative to surgical excision (SE), the latter is most commonly used for the management of benign and high-risk breast lesions. To evaluate the healthcare benefit of VAE, hospital costs and cosmetic outcome after VAE were compared to SE. Additionally, the impact of VAE implementation on hospital costs was investigated. This was a single-centre retrospective cohort study with two cohorts: "VAE" and "SE". All patients with a benign or high-risk lesion excised by VAE or SE from January 2016 up to December 2019 were included. Cosmetic outcome was measured with the BCTOS-cosmetic subscale, and hospital costs were presented as mean (SD) and median (IQR). During the study period, 258 patients with 295 excised lesions were included. The initial procedure was VAE in 102 patients and SE in 156 patients. Hospital costs after (median € 2324) were significantly lower than before (median € 3,144) implementation of VAE (mean difference € 1,004, &lt; 0.001), most likely attributable to the lower costs for patients treated with VAE (mean difference € 1,979, &lt; 0.001). Mean cosmetic outcome was comparable between VAE (median 1.35) and SE (median 1.44, = 0.802). Implementing VAE as an alternative treatment option for benign and high-risk breast lesions resulted in a large decrease in hospital costs but a cosmetic benefit of VAE could not be demonstrated in this retrospective study. Costs associated with the complete patient pathway were included and not only VAE was compared to SE but also the before cohort was compared to the after cohort to demonstrate the benefit of VAE implementation in clinical practice. Additionally, cosmetic outcome was compared between VAE and SE using patient reported outcome measures.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>The British Institute of Radiology</pub><pmid>35604725</pmid><doi>10.1259/bjr.20220117</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2392-9763</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0007-1285
ispartof British journal of radiology, 2022-08, Vol.95 (1136), p.20220117
issn 0007-1285
1748-880X
1748-880X
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10162056
source MEDLINE; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Breast - pathology
Breast Neoplasms - pathology
Breast Neoplasms - surgery
Female
Hospital Costs
Humans
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Retrospective Studies
Vacuum
title Hospital costs and cosmetic outcome of benign and high-risk breast lesions managed by vacuum-assisted excision versus surgical excision
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T13%3A18%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Hospital%20costs%20and%20cosmetic%20outcome%20of%20benign%20and%20high-risk%20breast%20lesions%20managed%20by%20vacuum-assisted%20excision%20versus%20surgical%20excision&rft.jtitle=British%20journal%20of%20radiology&rft.au=van%20de%20Voort,%20Elles%20Mf&rft.date=2022-08-01&rft.volume=95&rft.issue=1136&rft.spage=20220117&rft.pages=20220117-&rft.issn=0007-1285&rft.eissn=1748-880X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1259/bjr.20220117&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2668222770%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2668222770&rft_id=info:pmid/35604725&rfr_iscdi=true