Factors associated with unplanned readmissions and costs following resection of brain metastases in the United States

Unplanned 30-Day Readmission in Glioblastoma Patients: Implications for the Extent of Resection and Adjuvant Therapy

BACKGROUND

Unplanned early readmission (UER) within 30 days after hospital release is a negative prognostic marker for patients diagnosed with glioblastoma (GBM). This work analyzes the impact of UER on the effects of standard therapy modalities for GBM patients, including the extent of resection (EOR) and adjuvant therapy regimen.

METHODS

Records were searched for patients with newly diagnosed GBM between 2014 and 2020 who were treated at our facility. Exclusion criteria were being aged below 18 years or missing data. An overall survival (OS) analysis (Kaplan-Meier estimate; Cox regression) was performed on various GBM patient sub-cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 276 patients were included in the study. UER occurred in 13.4% (n = 37) of all cases, significantly reduced median OS (5.7 vs. 14.5 months, p < 0.001 by logrank), and was associated with an increased hazard of mortality (hazard ratio 3.875, p < 0.001) in multivariate Cox regression when other clinical parameters were applied as confounders. The Kaplan-Meier analysis also showed that patients experiencing UER still benefitted from adjuvant radio-chemotherapy when compared to radiotherapy or no adjuvant therapy (p < 0.001 by logrank). A higher EOR did not improve OS in GBM patients with UER (p = 0.659).

CONCLUSION

UER is negatively associated with survival in GBM patients. In contrast to EOR, adjuvant radio-chemotherapy was beneficial, even after UER.

Cost-effectiveness of invasive monitoring strategies in epilepsy surgery

OBJECTIVE

Drug-resistant epilepsy occurs in up to 40% of patients with epilepsy who may be considered for epilepsy surgery. For drug-resistant focal epilepsy, up to 50% of patients require invasive monitoring prior to surgery. Of the most common invasive monitoring strategies (subdural electrodes [SDEs] and stereo-electroencephalography [sEEG]), the most cost-effective strategy is unknown despite substantial differences in morbidity profiles.

METHODS

Using data collected from an internationally representative sample published in available systematic reviews and meta-analyses, this economic evaluation study employs a decision analysis model to simulate the risks and benefits of SDE and sEEG invasive monitoring strategies. In this model, patients faced differing risks of morbidity, mortality, resection, and seizure freedom depending on which invasive monitoring strategy they underwent. A range of cost values was obtained from a recently published single-center cost-utility analysis. The model considers a base case simulation of a characteristic patient with drug-resistant epilepsy using clinical parameters obtained from systematic reviews of invasive monitoring available in the literature. The main outcome measure was the probability of a positive outcome after invasive monitoring, which was defined as improvement in seizures without a complication. Cost-effectiveness was measured using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

RESULTS

Invasive monitoring with sEEG had an increased cost of $274 and increased probability of effectiveness of 0.02 compared with SDEs, yielding an ICER of $12,630 per positive outcome obtained. Sensitivity analyses varied parameters widely and revealed consistent model results across the range of clinical parameters reported in the literature. One-way sensitivity analyses revealed that invasive monitoring strategy costs were the most influential parameter for model outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

In this analysis, based on available observational data and estimates of complication costs, invasive monitoring with either SDEs or sEEG was nearly equivalent in terms of cost-effectiveness.