Refine
Year of publication
- 2019 (2)
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- Cancer treatment (1)
- Digestive system procedures (1)
- Economics (1)
- Endoscopy (1)
- Esophagectomy (1)
- Health economics (1)
- Oncology (1)
- Surgical oncology (1)
- immunology and infectious diseases (1)
- transplantation (1)
Institute
- Medizin (2)
Objective: Fluconazle or posaconazole is a standard of care in antifungal prophylaxis for patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). However, many patients need to interrupt standard prophylaxis due to intolerability, drug‐drug interactions, or toxicity. Micafungin has come to prominence for these patients. However, the optimal biological dose of micafungin stays unclear.
Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the efficacy of micafungin as antifungal prophylaxis in HSCT patients. Micafungin was applied as bridging in patients who were not eligible to receive oral posaconazole. Micafungin was either given at a dose of 100 mg or 50 mg SID.
Results: A total of 173 patients received micafungin prophylaxis, 62 in the 100 mg and 111 in the 50 mg dose group. The incidence of probable or proven breakthrough IFDs during the observation period was one in the 100 mg and one in the 50 mg group. Fungal‐free survival after 100 days was 98% and 99% (P = .842), and overall survival after 365 days was 60% and 63% (P = .8) respectively. In both groups, micafungin was well tolerated with no grade 3 or 4 toxicities.
Conclusion: In this retrospective analysis, which was not powered to detect non‐inferiority, micafungin is effective and complements posaconazole as fungal prophylaxis in HSCT.
Background: Complications after surgery for esophageal cancer are associated with significant resource utilization. The aim of this study was to analyze the economic burden of two frequently used endoscopic treatments for anastomotic leak management after esophageal surgery: Treatment with a Self-expanding Metal Stent (SEMS) and Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy (EVT).
Materials and methods: Between January 2012 and December 2016, we identified 60 German-Diagnosis Related Group (G-DRG) cases of patients who received a SEMS and / or EVT for esophageal anastomotic leaks. Direct costs per case were analyzed according to the Institute for Remuneration System in Hospitals (InEK) cost-accounting approach by comparing DRG payments on the case level, including all extra fees per DRG catalogue.
Results: In total, 60 DRG cases were identified. Of these, 15 patients were excluded because they received a combination of SEMS and EVT. Another 6 cases could not be included due to incomplete DRG data. Finally, N = 39 DRG cases were analyzed from a profit-center perspective. A further analysis of the most frequent DRG code -G03- including InEK cost accounting, revealed almost twice the deficit for the EVT group (N = 13 cases, € - 9.282 per average case) compared to that for the SEMS group (N = 9 cases, € - 5.156 per average case).
Conclusion: Endoscopic treatments with SEMS and EVT for anastomotic leaks following oncological Ivor Lewis esophagectomies are not cost-efficient for German hospitals. Due to longer hospitalization and insufficient reimbursements, EVT is twice as costly as SEMS treatment. An adequate DRG cost compensation is needed for SEMS and EVT.