指导非肉眼可见乳腺肿瘤手术切除的无导线、非放射性定位技术:健康技术评估》。

Q1 Medicine Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series Pub Date : 2023-05-17 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01
{"title":"指导非肉眼可见乳腺肿瘤手术切除的无导线、非放射性定位技术:健康技术评估》。","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The current standard treatment for nonpalpable breast tumours is surgical excision; however, it is nearly impossible to locate these small masses during surgery. Therefore, a marker must be implanted into the abnormal tissue under mammography or ultrasound guidance prior to surgery to guide the surgeon to the location of the tumour. Two techniques to localize nonpalpable breast tumours are currently used in Ontario: wire-guided localization and radioactive seed localization.However, these techniques have some limitations. New wire-free, nonradioactive technologies that address these limitations are now available. We conducted a health technology assessment of wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques available in Canada that are used to localize nonpalpable breast tumours for surgical excision. This report includes an evaluation of the effectiveness, safety, and budget impact of publicly funding these techniques, as well as an evaluation of patient preferences and values.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a systematic literature search of the clinical evidence. We assessed the risk of bias of each included study using the ROBINS-I tool and the quality of the body of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria. We performed a systematic economic literature search, and we analyzed the budget impact of publicly funding wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques to guide surgical excision of nonpalpable breast tumours in Ontario. We did not conduct a primary economic evaluation because of the limited data available to use as model inputs. To contextualize the potential value of wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques, we spoke with people who had undergone a localization procedure for the surgical excision of a nonpalpable breast tumour.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 16 studies in the clinical evidence review, of which 15 were comparative studies and one was a single-arm study. The results of our analysis of the comparative studies suggest that the re-excision rate for the wire-guided, nonradioactive devices included in this review is either lower or not different from the rate for conventional localization methods (GRADE: Moderate/Low). We found no difference in postoperative complications or operation time between the new and the conventional techniques (GRADE: Moderate). In a feasibility study of a newly developed magnetic seed device in Ontario, no patient required re-excision (GRADE: not assessed). Our economic evidence review identified two costing studies that found that wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques were more expensive than wire-guided and radioactive seed localization. We were unable to identify any published cost-effectiveness evidence for wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques. The annual budget impact of publicly funding wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques in Ontario over the next 5 years ranges from an additional $0.51 million in year 1 to an additional $2.61 million in year 5, for a total 5-year budget impact of $7.73 million. The people we spoke with who had undergone a localization procedure reported valuing surgical interventions that are clinically effective, timely, and patient centred. They responded positively to the potential public funding of wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques and felt that equitable access should be a requirement of implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques included in this review are effective and safe methods for the localization of nonpalpable breast tumours and are reasonable alternatives to wire-guided and radioactive seed localization. We estimate that publicly funding wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques in Ontario would result in an additional cost of $7.73 million over the next 5 years. Broad access to wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques may have a positive impact on patients undergoing surgical excision for a nonpalpable breast tumour. People with lived experience of a localization procedure value surgical interventions that are clinically effective, timely, and patient centred. They also value equitable access to surgical care.</p>","PeriodicalId":39160,"journal":{"name":"Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series","volume":"23 2","pages":"1-139"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10241192/pdf/ohtas-23-2.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wire-Free, Nonradioactive Localization Techniques to Guide Surgical Excision of Nonpalpable Breast Tumours: A Health Technology Assessment.\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The current standard treatment for nonpalpable breast tumours is surgical excision; however, it is nearly impossible to locate these small masses during surgery. Therefore, a marker must be implanted into the abnormal tissue under mammography or ultrasound guidance prior to surgery to guide the surgeon to the location of the tumour. Two techniques to localize nonpalpable breast tumours are currently used in Ontario: wire-guided localization and radioactive seed localization.However, these techniques have some limitations. New wire-free, nonradioactive technologies that address these limitations are now available. We conducted a health technology assessment of wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques available in Canada that are used to localize nonpalpable breast tumours for surgical excision. This report includes an evaluation of the effectiveness, safety, and budget impact of publicly funding these techniques, as well as an evaluation of patient preferences and values.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a systematic literature search of the clinical evidence. We assessed the risk of bias of each included study using the ROBINS-I tool and the quality of the body of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria. We performed a systematic economic literature search, and we analyzed the budget impact of publicly funding wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques to guide surgical excision of nonpalpable breast tumours in Ontario. We did not conduct a primary economic evaluation because of the limited data available to use as model inputs. To contextualize the potential value of wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques, we spoke with people who had undergone a localization procedure for the surgical excision of a nonpalpable breast tumour.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 16 studies in the clinical evidence review, of which 15 were comparative studies and one was a single-arm study. The results of our analysis of the comparative studies suggest that the re-excision rate for the wire-guided, nonradioactive devices included in this review is either lower or not different from the rate for conventional localization methods (GRADE: Moderate/Low). We found no difference in postoperative complications or operation time between the new and the conventional techniques (GRADE: Moderate). In a feasibility study of a newly developed magnetic seed device in Ontario, no patient required re-excision (GRADE: not assessed). Our economic evidence review identified two costing studies that found that wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques were more expensive than wire-guided and radioactive seed localization. We were unable to identify any published cost-effectiveness evidence for wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques. The annual budget impact of publicly funding wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques in Ontario over the next 5 years ranges from an additional $0.51 million in year 1 to an additional $2.61 million in year 5, for a total 5-year budget impact of $7.73 million. The people we spoke with who had undergone a localization procedure reported valuing surgical interventions that are clinically effective, timely, and patient centred. They responded positively to the potential public funding of wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques and felt that equitable access should be a requirement of implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques included in this review are effective and safe methods for the localization of nonpalpable breast tumours and are reasonable alternatives to wire-guided and radioactive seed localization. We estimate that publicly funding wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques in Ontario would result in an additional cost of $7.73 million over the next 5 years. Broad access to wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques may have a positive impact on patients undergoing surgical excision for a nonpalpable breast tumour. People with lived experience of a localization procedure value surgical interventions that are clinically effective, timely, and patient centred. They also value equitable access to surgical care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39160,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series\",\"volume\":\"23 2\",\"pages\":\"1-139\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10241192/pdf/ohtas-23-2.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:目前,非肉眼可见的乳腺肿瘤的标准治疗方法是手术切除,但在手术过程中几乎不可能确定这些小肿块的位置。因此,手术前必须在乳房 X 线照相术或超声波引导下将标记物植入异常组织,以指导外科医生确定肿瘤位置。目前,安大略省使用两种技术来定位非肉眼可见的乳腺肿瘤:导线引导定位和放射性种子定位。现在已经出现了可以解决这些局限性的新型无导线、非放射性技术。我们对加拿大现有的无导线、非放射性定位技术进行了健康技术评估,这些技术用于定位非肉眼可见的乳腺肿瘤,以便进行手术切除。本报告包括对这些技术的有效性、安全性和公共资金预算影响的评估,以及对患者偏好和价值的评估:我们对临床证据进行了系统的文献检索。我们使用 ROBINS-I 工具评估了每项纳入研究的偏倚风险,并根据建议评估、发展和评价分级(GRADE)工作组的标准评估了证据的质量。我们进行了系统的经济文献检索,并分析了安大略省政府资助无导线、无放射性定位技术以指导非肉眼可见的乳腺肿瘤手术切除对预算的影响。由于可用作模型输入的数据有限,我们没有进行初级经济评估。为了明确无导线、非放射性定位技术的潜在价值,我们与接受过非肉眼可见的乳腺肿瘤手术切除定位程序的患者进行了交谈:我们在临床证据审查中纳入了 16 项研究,其中 15 项为比较研究,1 项为单臂研究。我们对比较研究的分析结果表明,本综述所纳入的线引导非放射性设备的再切除率低于传统定位方法或与传统定位方法无差异(GRADE:中度/低度)。我们发现新技术与传统技术在术后并发症或手术时间方面没有差异(GRADE:中度)。在安大略省进行的一项关于新开发的磁性种子装置的可行性研究中,没有患者需要再次切除(GRADE:未评估)。我们的经济证据审查发现了两项成本研究,发现无导线、非放射性定位技术比导线引导和放射性种子定位技术更昂贵。我们无法找到任何已发表的无导线、非放射性定位技术的成本效益证据。未来 5 年,安大略省对免导线非放射性定位技术进行公共资助的年度预算影响从第 1 年的额外 51 万美元到第 5 年的额外 261 万美元不等,5 年总预算影响为 773 万美元。与我们交谈过的接受过定位手术的人都表示,他们非常重视临床有效、及时和以患者为中心的手术干预。他们对无导线、无放射性定位技术可能获得的公共资助做出了积极回应,并认为公平使用应该是实施的一项要求:本综述中包括的无导线、非放射性定位技术是对非肉眼可见的乳腺肿瘤进行定位的有效且安全的方法,是导线引导和放射性种子定位的合理替代方法。我们估计,在安大略省公开资助免导线非放射性定位技术将在未来 5 年内带来 773 万美元的额外费用。广泛使用无导线、非放射性定位技术可能会对接受非肉眼可见乳腺肿瘤手术切除的患者产生积极影响。有过定位手术经历的人重视临床有效、及时和以患者为中心的手术干预。他们还重视公平获得手术治疗的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Wire-Free, Nonradioactive Localization Techniques to Guide Surgical Excision of Nonpalpable Breast Tumours: A Health Technology Assessment.

Background: The current standard treatment for nonpalpable breast tumours is surgical excision; however, it is nearly impossible to locate these small masses during surgery. Therefore, a marker must be implanted into the abnormal tissue under mammography or ultrasound guidance prior to surgery to guide the surgeon to the location of the tumour. Two techniques to localize nonpalpable breast tumours are currently used in Ontario: wire-guided localization and radioactive seed localization.However, these techniques have some limitations. New wire-free, nonradioactive technologies that address these limitations are now available. We conducted a health technology assessment of wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques available in Canada that are used to localize nonpalpable breast tumours for surgical excision. This report includes an evaluation of the effectiveness, safety, and budget impact of publicly funding these techniques, as well as an evaluation of patient preferences and values.

Methods: We performed a systematic literature search of the clinical evidence. We assessed the risk of bias of each included study using the ROBINS-I tool and the quality of the body of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria. We performed a systematic economic literature search, and we analyzed the budget impact of publicly funding wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques to guide surgical excision of nonpalpable breast tumours in Ontario. We did not conduct a primary economic evaluation because of the limited data available to use as model inputs. To contextualize the potential value of wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques, we spoke with people who had undergone a localization procedure for the surgical excision of a nonpalpable breast tumour.

Results: We included 16 studies in the clinical evidence review, of which 15 were comparative studies and one was a single-arm study. The results of our analysis of the comparative studies suggest that the re-excision rate for the wire-guided, nonradioactive devices included in this review is either lower or not different from the rate for conventional localization methods (GRADE: Moderate/Low). We found no difference in postoperative complications or operation time between the new and the conventional techniques (GRADE: Moderate). In a feasibility study of a newly developed magnetic seed device in Ontario, no patient required re-excision (GRADE: not assessed). Our economic evidence review identified two costing studies that found that wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques were more expensive than wire-guided and radioactive seed localization. We were unable to identify any published cost-effectiveness evidence for wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques. The annual budget impact of publicly funding wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques in Ontario over the next 5 years ranges from an additional $0.51 million in year 1 to an additional $2.61 million in year 5, for a total 5-year budget impact of $7.73 million. The people we spoke with who had undergone a localization procedure reported valuing surgical interventions that are clinically effective, timely, and patient centred. They responded positively to the potential public funding of wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques and felt that equitable access should be a requirement of implementation.

Conclusions: The wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques included in this review are effective and safe methods for the localization of nonpalpable breast tumours and are reasonable alternatives to wire-guided and radioactive seed localization. We estimate that publicly funding wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques in Ontario would result in an additional cost of $7.73 million over the next 5 years. Broad access to wire-free, nonradioactive localization techniques may have a positive impact on patients undergoing surgical excision for a nonpalpable breast tumour. People with lived experience of a localization procedure value surgical interventions that are clinically effective, timely, and patient centred. They also value equitable access to surgical care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series
Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Level 2 Polysomnography for the Diagnosis of Sleep Disorders: A Health Technology Assessment. Pelvic Floor Muscle Training for Stress Urinary Incontinence, Fecal Incontinence, and Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Health Technology Assessment. Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide Testing for the Diagnosis and Management of Asthma: a Health Technology Assessment. Sucrose Octasulfate-Impregnated Dressings for Adults With Difficult-to-Heal Noninfected Diabetic Foot Ulcers and Difficult-to-Heal Noninfected Venous Leg Ulcers: A Health Technology Assessment. Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Rectal Cancer: An Expedited Summary of the Clinical Evidence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1