Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author or Editor: Sarah T. Menacho x
  • By Author: Guan, Jian x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Herschel Wilde, Mohammed A. Azab, Abdullah M. Abunimer, Hussam Abou-Al-Shaar, Michael Karsy, Jian Guan, Sarah T. Menacho and Randy L. Jensen

OBJECTIVE

Gliomas occur in 3–4 individuals per 100,000 individuals and are one of the most common primary brain tumors. Treatment options are limited for gliomas despite the progressive nature of the disease. The authors used the Value Driven Outcomes (VDO) database to identify cost drivers and subgroups that are involved in the surgical treatment of gliomas.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of patients with gliomas treated at the authors’ institution from August 2011 to February 2018 was evaluated using medical records and the VDO database.

RESULTS

A total of 263 patients with intracranial gliomas met the authors’ inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis (WHO grade I: 2.0%; grade II: 18.5%; grade III: 18.1%; and grade IV: 61.4%). Facility costs were the major (64.4%) cost driver followed by supplies (16.2%), pharmacy (10.1%), imaging (4.5%), and laboratory (4.7%). Univariate analysis of cost contributors demonstrated that American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (p = 0.002), tumor recurrence (p = 0.06), Karnofsky Performance Scale score (p = 0.002), length of stay (LOS) (p = 0.0001), and maximal tumor size (p = 0.03) contributed significantly to the total costs. However, on multivariate analysis, only LOS (p = 0.0001) contributed significantly to total costs. More extensive tumor resection in WHO grade III and IV tumors was associated with significant improvement in survival (p = 0.004 and p = 0.02, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding care costs is challenging because of the highly complex, fragmented, and variable nature of healthcare delivery. Adopting effective strategies that would reduce facility costs and limit LOS is likely the most important aspect in reducing intracranial glioma treatment costs.

Restricted access

Bob S. Carter and Fred G. Barker II

Restricted access

Michael Karsy, Jian Guan, Ilyas Eli, Andrea A. Brock, Sarah T. Menacho and Min S. Park

OBJECTIVE

Hypovitaminosis D is prevalent in neurocritical care patients, but the potential to improve patient outcome by replenishing vitamin D has not been investigated. This single-center, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized (1:1) clinical trial was designed to assess the effect on patient outcome of vitamin D supplementation in neurocritical care patients with hypovitaminosis D.

METHODS

From October 2016 until April 2018, emergently admitted neurocritical care patients with vitamin D deficiency (≤ 20 ng/ml) were randomized to receive vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol, 540,000 IU) (n = 134) or placebo (n = 133). Hospital length of stay (LOS) was the primary outcome; secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, repeat vitamin D levels, patient complications, and patient disposition. Exploratory analysis evaluated specific subgroups of patients by LOS, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, and Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II).

RESULTS

Two-hundred seventy-four patients were randomized (intent-to-treat) and 267 were administered treatment within 48 hours of admission (as-treated; 61.2% of planned recruitment) and monitored. The mean age of as-treated patients was 54.0 ± 17.2 years (56.9% male, 77.2% white). After interim analysis suggested a low conditional power for outcome difference (predictive power 0.12), the trial was halted. For as-treated patients, no significant difference in hospital LOS (10.4 ± 14.5 days vs 9.1 ± 7.9 days, p = 0.4; mean difference 1.3, 95% CI −1.5 to 4.1) or ICU LOS (5.8 ± 7.5 days vs 5.4 ± 6.4 days, p = 0.4; mean difference 0.4, 95% CI −1.3 to 2.1) was seen between vitamin D3 and placebo groups, respectively. Vitamin D3 supplementation significantly improved repeat serum levels compared with placebo (20.8 ± 9.3 ng/ml vs 12.8 ± 4.8 ng/ml, p < 0.001) without adverse side effects. No subgroups were identified by exclusion of LOS outliers or segregation by GCS score, SAPS II, or severe vitamin D deficiency (≤ 10 ng/ml).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite studies showing that vitamin D can predict prognosis, supplementation in vitamin D–deficient neurocritical care patients did not result in appreciable improvement in outcomes and likely does not play a role in acute clinical recovery.

Clinical trial registration no.: NCT02881957 (clinicaltrials.gov)