Key result
A fictive model of intra-cardiac echocardiography without general anesthesia for atrial septal closure suggested a cost saving of EUR 881, though the catheter itself costs EUR 2000-2500.
Why the study?
Does intra-cardiac echocardiography reduce hospitalization costs compared to standard TEE with general anaesthesia in patients undergoing atrial septal closure?
Population
5 patients scheduled for percutaneous patent foramen ovale or atrial septal defect closure.
Comparison
Intra-cardiac echocardiography without… vs Standard procedure with transoesophageal…
Design
Case_series, Patients were randomly selected to use the AcuNav catheter on top…
Authors
Loading...
Modeled savings from avoiding anesthesia fail to offset ICE catheter costs in ASD closure; hypothesis-generating and should not change practice.
Does intra-cardiac echocardiography reduce hospitalization costs compared to standard TEE with general anaesthesia in patients undergoing atrial septal closure?
Mean Difference: 881
Absolute Event Rate: 8464% vs 9345%
While ICE avoids general anaesthesia in atrial septal closure, the associated hospital cost savings do not offset the high price of the single-use catheter.
Budts et al. (2010) studied Patent foramen ovale (PFO) or atrial septal defect (ASD) (n=5). Intra-cardiac echocardiography (ICE) without general anaesthesia vs. Standard procedure with transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and general anaesthesia was evaluated on Total hospitalization cost (Cost saving EUR 881). A fictive model of intra-cardiac echocardiography without general anesthesia for atrial septal closure suggested a cost saving of EUR 881, though the catheter itself costs EUR 2000-2500.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: