Search

Background: In Europe, transplantation centres use different nephrectomy techniques: open surgery, and standard, hand-assisted and robot-assisted laparoscopies. Few studies have analysed the disparity in costs and clinical outcomes between techniques. Since donors are healthy patients expecting minimum pain and fast recovery, this study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of four nephrectomy techniques focusing on early surgical outcomes, an essential in the donation act., Methods: A micro-costing approach was used to estimate the cost of implementation from a hospital perspective. Estimates took into account sterilization costs for multiple-use equipment, costs for purchasing single-use equipment, staff and analgesics. The study recruited donors in 20 centres in France. Quality of life by EuroQol-5D was assessed preoperatively, and 4 and 90 days post-operatively. Two effectiveness indicators were built: quality-of-life recovery and post-operative pain days averted (PPDA). The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02830568, on 10 June 2010., Results: A total of 264 donors were included; they underwent open surgery (n = 65), and standard (n = 65), hand-assisted (n = 65) and robot-assisted laparoscopies (n = 69). Use of the nephrectomy techniques differed greatly in cost of implementation and immediate post-operative outcomes but not in clinical outcomes at 90 days. At 4 days, hand-assisted laparoscopy provided the lowest cost per quality-of-life recovery unit of effectiveness (%) and PPDA (days) (€2056/40.1%/2.3 days, respectively). Robot-assisted laparoscopy was associated with the best post-operative outcomes but with the highest cost (€3430/59.1%/2.6 days)., Conclusion: Hand-assisted, standard and robot-assisted laparoscopies are cost-effective techniques compared with open surgery. Hand-assisted surgery is the most cost-effective procedure. Robot-assisted surgery requires more healthcare resource use but enables the best clinical outcome., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. All rights reserved.)

Background: An estimated 20-30% of end-stage lung disease patients awaiting lung transplant die whilst on the waiting list due to a shortage of suitable donor lungs. Ex-Vivo Lung Perfusion is a technique that reconditions donor lungs initially not deemed usable in order to make them suitable for transplantation, thereby increasing the donor pool. In this study, an economic evaluation was conducted as part of DEVELOP-UK, a multi-centre study assessing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the Ex-Vivo Lung Perfusion technique in the United Kingdom., Methods: We estimated the cost-effectiveness of a UK adult lung transplant service combining both standard and Ex-Vivo Lung Perfusion transplants compared to a service including only standard lung transplants. A Markov model was developed and populated with a combination of DEVELOP-UK, published and clinical routine data, and extrapolated to a lifetime horizon. Probabilistic sensitivity and scenario analyses were used to explore uncertainty in the final outcomes., Results: Base-case model results estimated life years gained of 0.040, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained of 0.045 and an incremental cost per QALY of £90,000 for Ex-Vivo Lung Perfusion. Scenario analyses carried out suggest that an improved rate of converting unusable donor lungs using Ex-Vivo Lung Perfusion, similar resource use post-transplant for both standard and EVLP lung transplant and applying increased waiting list costs would reduce ICERs to approximately £30,000 or below., Conclusion: DEVELOP-UK base-case results suggest that incorporating Ex-Vivo Lung Perfusion into the UK adult lung transplant service is more effective, increasing the number of donor lungs available for transplant, but would not currently be considered cost-effective in the UK using the present NICE threshold. However, results were sensitive to change in some model parameters and in several plausible scenario analyses results indicate that a service incorporating Ex-vivo lung perfusion would be considered cost-effective ., Trial Registration: ISRCTN registry number: ISRCTN44922411 . Date of registration: 06/02/2012. Retrospectively registered.

Background: Organ recovery costs should be assessed to allow efficient and sustainable integration of these costs into national healthcare budgets and policies. These costs are of considerable interest to health economists, hospitals, financial managers and policy makers in most developed countries. This study assessed organ recovery costs from 2007 to 2014 in the French healthcare system based on the national hospital discharge database and a national cost study. The secondary objective was to describe the variability in the population of deceased organ donors during this period., Methods: All stays for organ recovery in French hospitals between January 2007 and December 2014 were quantified from discharge abstracts and valued using a national cost study. Five cost evaluations were conducted to explore all aspects of organ recovery activities. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to test the methodological choice. Trends regarding organ recovery practices were assessed by monitoring indicators., Results: The analysis included 12 629 brain death donors, with 28 482 organs recovered. The mean cost of a hospital stay was €7469 (SD = €10, 894). The mean costs of separate kidney, liver, pancreas, intestine, heart, lung and heart-lung block recovery regardless of the organs recovered were €1432 (SD = €1342), €502 (SD = €782), €354 (SD = €475), €362 (SD = €1559), €542 (SD = €955), €977 (SD = €1196) and €737 (SD = €637), respectively. Despite a marginal increase in donors, the number of organs recovered increased primarily due to improved practices., Conclusion: Although cost management is the main challenge for successful organ recovery, other aspects such as organization modalities should be considered to improve organ availability.

The perception of living kidney donation-related financial burden affects willingness to donate and the experience of donation, yet no existing tools identify donors who are at higher risk of perceived financial burden. We sought to identify characteristics that predicted higher risk of perceived financial burden. We surveyed 51 living kidney donors (LKDs) who donated from 01/2015 to 3/2016 about socioeconomic characteristics, predonation cost concerns, and perceived financial burden. We tested associations between both self-reported and ZIP code-level characteristics and perceived burden using Fisher's exact test and bivariate modified Poisson regression. Donors who perceived donation-related financial burden were less likely to have an income above their ZIP code median (14% vs. 72%, P = .006); however, they were more likely than donors who did not perceive burden to rent their home (57% vs. 16%, P = .03), have an income <$60 000 (86% vs. 20%, P = .002), or have had predonation cost concerns (43% vs. 7%, P = .03). Perceived financial burden was 3.6-fold as likely among those with predonation cost concerns and 10.6-fold as likely for those with incomes <$60 000. Collecting socioeconomic characteristics and asking about donation-related cost concerns prior to donation might allow transplant centers to target financial support interventions toward potential donors at higher risk of perceiving donation-related financial burden., (© 2017 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Conventional split skin grafts (SSG) require anaesthesia, specialist equipment and can have high donor site (DS) morbidity. The CelluTome epidermal graft-harvesting device is a novel alternative, providing pain-free epidermal skin grafts (ESG) in the outpatient setting, with projected minimal DS trauma and improved patient satisfaction. This study aimed to compare ESG with SSG by evaluating patient-related outcome measures (PROMs) and the cost implications of both. Twenty patients answered a graft satisfaction questionnaire that evaluated: donor/graft site noticeability, aesthetic concerns, adverse problems and patient satisfaction. Cost/patient was calculated based on total operative expenses and five clinic follow-ups. In 100% of the ESG cases, there were no DS noticeability or adverse problems compared to 25% in the SSG group. Complete satisfaction with DS appearance was observed in 100% of the ESG cases (50% SSG). Noticeability, adverse problems and overall satisfaction were significantly better in ESG cases (P < 0.05). Graft site parameters were comparable with similar healing outcomes. The cost per patient for ESG was £431 and £1489 for SSG, with an annual saving of £126 960 based on 10 grafts/month. For the right patient, CelluTome provides comparable wound healing, with reduced DS morbidity and higher patient satisfaction., (© 2016 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Organ donation should neither enrich donors nor impose financial burdens on them. We described the scope of health care required for all living kidney donors, reflecting contemporary understanding of long-term donor health outcomes; proposed an approach to identify donor health conditions that should be covered within the framework of financial neutrality; and proposed strategies to pay for this care. Despite the Affordable Care Act in the United States, donors continue to have inadequate coverage for important health conditions that are donation related or that may compromise postdonation kidney function. Amendment of Medicare regulations is needed to clarify that surveillance and treatment of conditions that may compromise postdonation kidney function following donor nephrectomy will be covered without expense to the donor. In other countries lacking health insurance for all residents, sufficient data exist to allow the creation of a compensation fund or donor insurance policies to ensure appropriate care. Providing coverage for donation-related sequelae as well as care to preserve postdonation kidney function ensures protection against the financial burdens of health care encountered by donors throughout their lives. Providing coverage for this care should thus be cost-effective, even without considering the health care cost savings that occur for living donor transplant recipients., (© 2016 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Aim: To measure the private and social benefits of donor insemination (DI)., Methods: An empirical model investigates the general public and DI clients' willingness to pay (WTP) for DI, and the willingness of potential donors to become altruistic or paid sperm donors., Results: The general public and DI clients value DI and have a positive WTP for it, whereas willingness to donate, altruistically or for payment, is either low or very low., Conclusion: The general public's and DI clients' WTP for DI is in average above actual cost, so the government should consider funding or subsidizing DI. The government should encourage altruistic gamete donation through information and education of all parties involved directly and indirectly in the process of donation whose ultimate goal is the birth of a child.

Background: Centrifugation (Cf) is a common method of fat processing but may be time consuming, especially when processing large volumes., Objectives: To determine the effects on fat grafting time, volume efficiency, reoperations, and complication rates of Cf vs an autologous fat processing system (Rv) that incorporates fat harvesting and processing in a single unit., Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent autologous fat grafting during reconstructive breast surgery with Rv or Cf. Endpoints measured were volume of fat harvested (lipoaspirate) and volume injected after processing, time to complete processing, reoperations, and complications. A budget impact model was used to estimate cost of Rv vs Cf., Results: Ninety-eight patients underwent fat grafting with Rv, and 96 patients received Cf. Mean volumes of lipoaspirate (506.0 vs 126.1 mL) and fat injected (177.3 vs 79.2 mL) were significantly higher (P < .0001) in the Rv vs Cf group, respectively. Mean time to complete fat grafting was significantly shorter in the Rv vs Cf group (34.6 vs 90.1 minutes, respectively; P < .0001). Proportions of patients with nodule and cyst formation and/or who received reoperations were significantly less in the Rv vs Cf group. Based on these outcomes and an assumed per minute operating room cost, an average per patient cost savings of $2,870.08 was estimated with Rv vs Cf., Conclusions: Compared to Cf, the Rv fat processing system allowed for a larger volume of fat to be processed for injection and decreased operative time in these patients, potentially translating to cost savings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 3., (© 2016 The American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Inc.)

Some transplant programs consider the lack of health insurance as a contraindication to living kidney donation. Still, prior studies have shown that many adults are uninsured at time of donation. We extend the study of donor health insurance status over a longer time period and examine associations between insurance status and relevant sociodemographic and health characteristics. We queried the United Network for Organ Sharing/Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network registry for all living kidney donors (LKDs) between July 2004 and July 2015. Of the 53 724 LKDs with known health insurance status, 8306 (16%) were uninsured at the time of donation. Younger (18 to 34 years old), male, minority, unemployed, less educated, unmarried LKDs and those who were smokers and normotensive were more likely to not have health insurance at the time of donation. Compared to those with no health risk factors (i.e. obesity, smoking, hypertension, estimated glomerular filtration rate <60, proteinuria) (14%), LKDs with 1 (18%) or ≥2 (21%) health risk factors at the time of donation were more likely to be uninsured (p < 0.0001). Among those with ≥2 health risk factors, blacks (28%) and Hispanics (27%) had higher likelihood of being uninsured compared to whites (19%; p < 0.001). Study findings underscore the importance of providing health insurance benefits to all previous and future LKDs., (© Copyright 2016 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Background: Many patients awaiting lung transplantation die before a donor organ becomes available. Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) allows initially unusable donor lungs to be assessed and reconditioned for clinical use., Objective: The objective of the Donor Ex Vivo Lung Perfusion in UK lung transplantation study was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of EVLP in increasing UK lung transplant activity., Design: A multicentre, unblinded, non-randomised, non-inferiority observational study to compare transplant outcomes between EVLP-assessed and standard donor lungs., Setting: Multicentre study involving all five UK officially designated NHS adult lung transplant centres., Participants: Patients aged ≥ 18 years with advanced lung disease accepted onto the lung transplant waiting list., Intervention: The study intervention was EVLP assessment of donor lungs before determining suitability for transplantation., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was survival during the first 12 months following lung transplantation. Secondary outcome measures were patient-centred outcomes that are influenced by the effectiveness of lung transplantation and that contribute to the health-care costs., Results: Lungs from 53 donors unsuitable for standard transplant were assessed with EVLP, of which 18 (34%) were subsequently transplanted. A total of 184 participants received standard donor lungs. Owing to the early closure of the study, a non-inferiority analysis was not conducted. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of survival at 12 months was 0.67 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 0.83] for the EVLP arm and 0.80 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.85) for the standard arm. The hazard ratio for overall 12-month survival in the EVLP arm relative to the standard arm was 1.96 (95% CI 0.83 to 4.67). Patients in the EVLP arm required ventilation for a longer period and stayed longer in an intensive therapy unit (ITU) than patients in the standard arm, but duration of overall hospital stay was similar in both groups. There was a higher rate of very early grade 3 primary graft dysfunction (PGD) in the EVLP arm, but rates of PGD did not differ between groups after 72 hours. The requirement for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support was higher in the EVLP arm (7/18, 38.8%) than in the standard arm (6/184, 3.2%). There were no major differences in rates of chest radiograph abnormalities, infection, lung function or rejection by 12 months. The cost of EVLP transplants is approximately £35,000 higher than the cost of standard transplants, as a result of the cost of the EVLP procedure, and the increased ECMO use and ITU stay. Predictors of cost were quality of life on joining the waiting list, type of transplant and number of lungs transplanted. An exploratory model comparing a NHS lung transplant service that includes EVLP and standard lung transplants with one including only standard lung transplants resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £73,000. Interviews showed that patients had a good understanding of the need for, and the processes of, EVLP. If EVLP can increase the number of usable donor lungs and reduce waiting, it is likely to be acceptable to those waiting for lung transplantation. Study limitations include small numbers in the EVLP arm, limiting analysis to descriptive statistics and the EVLP protocol change during the study., Conclusions: Overall, one-third of donor lungs subjected to EVLP were deemed suitable for transplant. Estimated survival over 12 months was lower than in the standard group, but the data were also consistent with no difference in survival between groups. Patients receiving these additional transplants experience a higher rate of early graft injury and need for unplanned ECMO support, at increased cost. The small number of participants in the EVLP arm because of early study termination limits the robustness of these conclusions. The reason for the increased PGD rates, high ECMO requirement and possible differences in lung injury between EVLP protocols needs evaluation., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN44922411., Funding: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment ; Vol. 20, No. 85. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

The aim of this article was to analyze contractual incentives for kidney transplants in Brazil based on the principal-agent model. The approach assumes that the Brazilian Ministry of Health is the principal and the public hospitals accredited by the National Transplant System are the agent. The Ministry of Health's welfare depends on measures taken by hospitals in kidney uptake. Hospitals allocate administrative, financial, and management efforts to conduct measures in kidney donation, removal, uptake, and transplantation. Hospitals may choose the levels of effort that are consistent with the payments and incentives received in relation to transplantation costs. The solution to this type of problem lies in structuring an optimal incentives contract, which requires aligning the interests of both parties involved in the transplantation system.

Some living kidney donors (LKDs) incur costs associated with donation, although these costs are not well characterized in the United States. We collected cost data in the 12 mo following donation from 182 LKDs participating in the multicenter prospective Kidney Donor Outcomes Cohort (KDOC) Study. Most LKDs (n = 167, 92%) had one direct cost or more following donation, including ground transportation (86%), health care (41%), meals (53%), medications (36%), lodging (23%), and air transportation (12%). LKDs missed 33 072 total work hours, 40% of which were unpaid and led to $302 175 in lost wages (mean $1660). Caregivers lost $68 655 in wages (mean $377). Although some donors received financial assistance, 89% had a net financial loss in the 12-mo period, with one-third (33%) reporting a loss exceeding $2500. Financial burden was higher for those with greater travel distance to the transplant center (Spearman's ρ = 0.26, p < 0.001), lower household income (Spearman's ρ = -0.25, p < 0.001), and more unpaid work hours missed (Spearman's ρ = 0.52, p < 0.001). Achieving financial neutrality for LKDs must be an immediate priority for the transplant community, governmental agencies, insurance companies, nonprofit organizations, and society at large., (© Copyright 2016 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

The supply of organs—particularly kidneys—donated by living and deceased donors falls short of the number of patients added annually to transplant waiting lists in the United States. To remedy this problem, a number of prominent physicians, ethicists, economists and others have mounted a campaign to suspend the prohibitions in the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984 (NOTA) on the buying and selling of organs. The argument that providing financial benefits would incentivize enough people to part with a kidney (or a portion of a liver) to clear the waiting lists is flawed. This commentary marshals arguments against the claim that the shortage of donor organs would best be overcome by providing financial incentives for donation. We can increase the number of organs available for transplantation by removing all financial disincentives that deter unpaid living or deceased kidney donation. These disincentives include a range of burdens, such as the costs of travel and lodging for medical evaluation and surgery, lost wages, and the expense of dependent care during the period of organ removal and recuperation. Organ donation should remain an act that is financially neutral for donors, neither imposing financial burdens nor enriching them monetarily., (© Copyright 2015 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

New approaches to address the kidney scarcity in the United States are urgently needed. The greatest potential source of kidneys is from living donors. Proposals to offer financial incentives to increase living kidney donation rates remain highly controversial. Despite repeated calls for a pilot study to assess the impact of financial compensation on living kidney donation rates, many fear that financial incentives will exploit vulnerable individuals and cast the field of transplantation in a negative public light, ultimately reducing donation rates. This paper provides an ethical justification for conducting a pilot study of a federally regulated approach to providing financial incentives to living kidney donors, with the goal of assessing donors' perceptions., (© Copyright 2015 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

The potential use of financial compensation to increase living kidney donation rates remains controversial in potentially introducing undue inducement of vulnerable populations to donate. This cross-sectional study assessed amounts of financial compensation that would generate motivation and an undue inducement to donate to family/friends or strangers. Individuals leaving six Departments of Motor Vehicles were surveyed. Of the 210 participants who provided verbal consent (94% participation rate), respondents' willingness to donate would not change (70%), or would increase (29%) with compensation. Median lowest amounts of financial compensation for which participants would begin to consider donating a kidney were $5000 for family/friends, and $10,000 for strangers; respondents reporting $0 for family/friends (52%) or strangers (26%) were excluded from analysis. Median lowest amounts of financial compensation for which participants could no longer decline (perceive an undue inducement) were $50,000 for family/friends, and $100,000 for strangers; respondents reporting $0 for family/friends (44%) or strangers (23%) were excluded from analysis. The two most preferred forms of compensation included: direct payment of money (61%) and paid leave (21%). The two most preferred uses of compensation included: paying off debt (38%) and paying nonmedical expenses associated with the transplant (29%). Findings suggest tolerance for, but little practical impact of, financial compensation. Certain compensation amounts could motivate the public to donate without being perceived as an undue inducement., (© Copyright 2014 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is the preferred method of living kidney donation at most transplant centres. There are various techniques, all with their own reported benefits. This editorial gives a brief overview of the various methods in the context of ensuring maximum safety and benefit to the donor without compromising kidney transplant outcomes.

Objective: Endoscopic vein harvesting (EVH) for arterial bypass surgery may be associated with lower wound complication rates than open vein harvesting (OVH), but other long-term outcomes remain controversial, and there are concerns that graft patency may be poorer after EVH compared with OVH. We conducted a systematic review of all available evidence for EVH in lower extremity arterial bypass (LEAB)., Methods: A literature search of Medline, Embase, Ovid and Cochrane databases between 1996 and 2013 was performed using the terms "endoscopic vein harvesting", "minimally invasive vein harvest", "peripheral bypass surgery", and "lower extremity bypass surgery", and detailed in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Primary outcomes were graft patency and overall wound complication rates. Secondary outcomes were wound infection, length of hospital stay, and cost-effectiveness. Summary estimates were calculated by random effects meta-analysis if sufficient data were available., Results: We identified 18 cohort studies and case series, with considerable clinical heterogeneity, including 2,343 patients. Meta-analysis of six studies revealed a significantly reduced rate of primary patency after EVH (hazard ratio 1.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.63), with no significant difference between EVH and OVH with respect to wound infection in 12 studies (odds ratio 0.81, 95% CI 0.61-1.08). There was a lack of strong evidence to support the secondary outcomes of EVH., Conclusion: EVH reduces primary patency rates after LEAB, but does not demonstrate an advantage with respect to postoperative wound complications. However, the available data are heterogeneous, and uncertainty is introduced by both evolution in technology and increasing technical experience. EVH should be used with caution and in the context of formal research., (Copyright © 2014 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Some living kidney donors incur economic consequences as a result of donation; however, these costs are poorly quantified. We developed a framework to comprehensively assess economic consequences from the donor perspective including out-of-pocket cost, lost wages and home productivity loss. We prospectively enrolled 100 living kidney donors from seven Canadian centers between 2004 and 2008 and collected and valued economic consequences ($CAD 2008) at 3 months and 1 year after donation. Almost all (96%) donors experienced economic consequences, with 94% reporting travel costs and 47% reporting lost pay. The average and median costs of lost pay were $2144 (SD 4167) and $0 (25th-75th percentile 0, 2794), respectively. For other expenses (travel, accommodation, medication and medical), mean and median costs were $1780 (SD 2504) and $821 (25th-75th percentile 242, 2271), respectively. From the donor perspective, mean cost was $3268 (SD 4704); one-third of donors incurred cost >$3000, and 15% >$8000. The majority of donors (83%) reported inability to perform usual household activities for an average duration of 33 days; 8% reported out-of-pocket costs for assistance with these activities. The economic impact of living kidney donation for some individuals is large. We advocate for programs to reimburse living donors for their legitimate costs., (© 2014 The Authors. American Journal of Transplantation Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Israel and Pakistan--two major participants in the global organ trade--enacted legislative prohibitions on the trade at roughly the same time. The article highlights three influences that brought about this change of policy in both countries: advocacy by local physicians coupled with media coverage and reinforced by the international medical community. The analysis also explains why the two countries have differed with respect to the enforcement of the organ-trade prohibition. The insights from the Israeli and Pakistani cases will be of use for the transplant community's efforts against organ trafficking., (© Copyright 2013 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Background: A short saphenous vein segment is commonly used as a conduit for coronary artery bypass grafting, and clinicians must decide whether to obtain it by performing open (OVH) or endoscopic vein harvest (EVH). We conducted a health economic evaluation, using data on resource usage collected alongside a randomized controlled trial, to investigate whether EVH is cost-effective compared with OVH., Methods: Analyses were performed in accordance with international guidelines for health economic evaluations. We constructed 3 cost-levels as the current literature is inconclusive as to which resource consumptions differ significantly between harvesting methods. Outcomes were measured as purulent infections avoided in the cost-effectiveness analysis and for the cost-utility analysis we estimated quality-adjusted life-years gained. Results were presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios: ie, the extra cost of obtaining one extra quality-adjusted life-year and the extra cost of avoiding one purulent infection. To handle uncertainties, we performed bias corrected bootstrap analyses on 5,000 resamples and constructed cost-effectiveness acceptability curves., Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $79,391/quality-adjusted life-year and $1,970/purulent infection avoided when costs and outcomes within 35 days postoperatively were compared. Within 35 days postoperatively, EVH was less than 1% cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/quality-adjusted life-year., Conclusions: The EVH was not cost-effective within 35 days postoperatively. Future studies should investigate long-term cost effectiveness., (Copyright © 2012 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Pakistan has the unenviable reputation for being one of the world's leading 'transplant tourism' destinations, largely the buying and selling of kidneys from its impoverished population to rich international patients. After nearly two decades of pressure to formally prohibit the trade, the Government of Pakistan promulgated the 'Transplantation of Human Organs and Human Tissue Ordinance' (THOTO) in 2007. This was then passed by Senate and enshrined in law in March 2010. This paper gives a brief overview of the organ trade within Pakistan and analyses the criteria of THOTO in banning the widespread practise. It then goes on to answer: 'To what extent will THOTO succeed in curbing Pakistan's kidney trade?' This is aided by the use of a comparative case study looking at India's failed organ trade legislation. This paper concludes THOTO has set a strong basis for curbing Pakistan's kidney trade. However, for this to be successfully achieved, it needs to be implemented with strong and sustained political will, strict and efficient enforcement as well as effective monitoring and evaluation. Efforts are needed to tackle both 'supply' and 'demand' factors of Pakistan's kidney trade, with developed countries also having a responsibility to reduce the flow of citizens travelling to Pakistan to purchase a kidney.

Objective: Greater saphenous vein harvest for coronary and lower extremity bypass requires the longest incision of any surgical procedure. Endoscopic vein harvest allows better results in some clinical variables compared to open harvesting techniques. The objective of this study is to present the results of a systematic review of the scientific evidence about the efficiency of endoscopic saphenous vein harvest., Methods: We performed a systematic review in the bibliographical databases Pubmed, National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, and NHS Health Technology Assessment Database. The search strategy was "endoscopic AND harvesting", in the period January 1970-December 2009., Results: We identified only 3 economic evaluation studies, 2 cost analyses with some methodological limitations, and 1 cost-utility analysis. All of them suggest lower hospital costs for endoscopic harvesting., Conclusions: Available evidence does not allow recommendations to be made based on the efficiency of endoscopic saphenous vein harvest, although it suggests lower costs for endoscopic harvesting. More scientific evidence about the long-term efficacy and the effectiveness of this technique is necessary, with studies measuring final outcomes, and carrying out complete and rigorous economic evaluations., (Copyright © 2011 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: in [patients undergoing coronary revascularisation] is [endoscopic vein harvest] superior to [open harvest] in improving [clinical outcome and cost effectiveness]? Altogether >166 papers were found using the reported search, of which eight represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. All papers agree that endoscopic vein harvesting (EVH) reduces the level of postoperative pain (pain score for EVH=0.52+/-0.95; open technique=1.02+/-1.51; P=0.03) and wound complications (range from 3 to 7.4% for EVH and 13 to 19.4% for conventional technique). These clinical benefits were associated with a high level of patient satisfaction. On average, four papers found that the length of hospital stay was reduced in the EVH group [weighted mean difference (WMD) -1.04 to -0.85; confidence interval (CI) -1.92 to -0.16; P=0.02]. The overall occlusion rates of venous grafts after six months were 21.7% for EVH and 17.6% for open technique. There were no differences in the six months occlusion and disease rates between EVH and conventional vein harvest (CVH), as determined by means of univariate analysis (P=0.584). However, some papers (PREVENT-IV sub-analysis and Yun et al.) called into question EVH by reporting high vein occlusion rates. At six months, this was 21.7% for EVH and 17.6% for open technique rising to 46.7% vs. 38.0% (P<0.001) at 12-18 months. At three years, endoscopic harvesting was also associated with higher rates of death, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularisation (20.2% vs. 17.4%; P=0.04), death or myocardial infarction (9.3% vs. 7.6%; P=0.01), and death (7.4% vs. 5.8%; P=0.005). We conclude that EVH reduces the level of postoperative pain and wound complication, with a high-level of patient satisfaction but a sub-analysis of a large RCT has recently called into question the medium- to long-term patency of grafts endoscopically harvested.

Purpose: To compare the costs of femoral head banking versus bone substitutes., Methods: Records of femoral head banking from 1998 to 2008 were reviewed. The cost of allogenic cancellous bone graft was calculated by estimating the direct expenditure of femoral head procurement, screening tests, and storage, and then divided by the amount of bone harvested., Results: 326 females and 141 males (mean age, 80.3 years) donated 470 femoral heads. Each transplantable femoral head costs US$978. Each gram of transplantable allogenic bone graft costs US$86, compared with US$9 to 26 per gram for commercially available bone substitutes., Conclusion: Compared with bone substitutes, femoral head banking in Hong Kong was less economical. Unless allografts yield superior outcomes, harvesting femoral heads for general usage (such as filling bone voids for fresh fractures) is not justified from a financial perspective, especially in banks dedicated to procuring bone from femoral heads only.

Introduction: The objectives of this study were to: (i) assess the feasibility of minimally invasive endoscopic harvesting of the long saphenous vein or radial artery for use as conduit during coronary artery bypass surgery in the NHS setting; and (ii) investigate the results of endoscopic vein harvesting with regards to postoperative complications, ability to mobilise, and patient satisfaction., Patients and Methods: In this prospective audit, 25 consecutive patients, aged 52-90 years, undergoing either coronary artery bypass grafting alone or together with valve surgery or atrial fibrillation ablation were studied. All data were entered in purpose-designed proforma. Pre-operative risk factors including increasing age, diabetes, peripheral vascular disease, obesity, renal impairment, tobacco consumption and steroid use were documented. Time taken for harvest and conversion to traditional open vein harvest, quality of harvested vein in terms of number of repairs and vein damage were recorded. Postoperatively, we recorded harvest site wound complications, number of days to mobilise and total hospital stay. Pain score and patient satisfaction were also assessed., Results: There was one death due to myocardial infarction; another patient had postoperative cerebrovascular accident. A total of 43 lengths of grafts were harvested, 41 were long saphenous vein and two radial artery. Vein harvest time reduced significantly from a maximum of 94 min to 34 min for two lengths of long saphenous vein. Three patients required conversion from endoscopic vein harvesting to open vein harvest. The only postoperative complication directly related to endoscopic harvesting was bruising along the tunnel created by the passage of the instruments. None of the patients had any wound complication; none required antibiotics or wound debridement. Mean time to mobilise was 3.4 days. All patients who underwent successful endoscopic vein harvesting expressed satisfaction with regards to postoperative pain and cosmetic result., Conclusions: Competence and ability to harvest conduit in an acceptable time frame are obtainable after a relatively low number of cases. The procedure is associated with a low number of postoperative complications and very high patient satisfaction.

This paper examines the "opt out" system of organ donation wherein the State permits removal of tissue and organs posthumously unless an express objection is made by the person prior to the death. This paper examines the need for "presumed consent" and the jurisprudential arguments in support of it. The social contract theory and the sociological approach based on the principle of "common good" support this system. However, the ethical concerns raised while implementing such a system are debatable. It is for societies to evaluate the situation and make a choice between "ethics"and "common good". The answer may not be obvious in a country like India where religion may supersede the question of life and death. The paper critically assesses both the issues, and concludes that presumed consent may be a viable method of addressing the organ shortage in India. However, we need public discourse and public awareness to change people's attitude to this concept.

Islet transplantation is a very promising therapy for select patients with type 1 diabetes. Continued clinical investigation is required to define the long-term safety and efficacy outcomes before the procedure will be accepted as a standard of care even for those with the most severe manifestations of diabetes. Threatening successful accomplishment of these and other innovative studies designed to advance the field are the complex financial cost accounting issues that pose undue burden on organ procurement organizations and transplant centers trying to manage the costs of the pancreata from deceased donors needed to isolate islets. Compounding the problem is the recent ruling by CMS regarding 'intent to transplant' (CMS-1543-R Dec. 21, 2006: Allocation of Donor Acquisition Costs Incurred by Organ Procurement Organizations) that does not account for the clinical need to complete the manufacturing process for islets before suitability and transplant intent of the pancreata involved can be determined. We provide a consensus document supported by a diverse group of stakeholders in islet transplantation to suggest actions to address this problem.

Objective: In this study we aim to assess the cost-effectiveness analysis of minimally invasive vein harvesting. The great saphenous vein is the most commonly used conduit in coronary artery bypass surgery. In the past decade minimally invasive techniques have been developed to reduce the surgical trauma associated with the conventional open vein-harvesting technique. There is strong evidence to suggest that minimally invasive harvesting can reduce postoperative wound healing complications, pain, mobility restriction, and hospital stay. Despite the increasingly widespread use of this technique, formal cost-effectiveness analysis has never been performed., Methods: Economic analysis was performed according to the National Institute of Healthcare and Clinical Excellence guidelines on the evaluation of technology by using published data on postoperative pain and mobility restriction, locally collected data, National Health Service reference costs, and manufacturer's data. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to investigate and quantify the uncertainty associated with the results of our analysis., Results: The results of our analysis demonstrate that minimally invasive vein harvesting was more cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $19,858.87/quality-adjusted life year (QALY), comparing favorably with other health care interventions. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated with 95.6% certainty that endoscopic harvesting was more cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/quality-adjusted life year. Alternative analysis suggested that even with considerable uncertainty associated with quality of life after vein harvesting, minimally invasive harvesting was more cost-effective than conventional vein harvesting., Conclusion: Minimally invasive harvesting is the most cost-effective method of harvesting the great saphenous vein and can significantly improve a patient's quality of life.

Background: Despite policies advocating centralised transfusion services based on voluntary donors, the hospital-based replacement donor system is widespread in sub-Saharan Africa., Aims: To evaluate the cost of all laboratory resources needed to provide a unit of safe blood in rural Malawi using the family replacement donor system, Methods: Full economic costs of all laboratory tests used to screen potential donors and to perform cross-matching were documented in a prospective, observational study in Ntcheu district hospital laboratory., Results: 1729 potential donors were screened and 11,008 tests were performed to ensure that 1104 units of safe blood were available for transfusion. The annual cost of all transfusion-related tests (in 2005 USdollars) was USdollars 17,976, equivalent to USdollars 16.28 per unit of transfusion-ready blood. Transfusion-related tests used 53% of the laboratory's total annual expenditure of USdollars 33,608., Conclusions: This is the first study to provide prospective economic costs of all laboratory tests associated with the family replacement donor system in a district hospital in Africa. Results show that despite potential economies of scale, a unit of blood from the centralised system costs about three times as much as one from the hospital-based "replacement" system. Factors affecting these relative costs are complex but are in part due to the cost of donor recruitment in centralised systems. In the replacement system the cost of donor recruitment is entirely borne by families of patients needing a blood transfusion.

Radial artery harvesting has been routinely performed by endoscopy. We present a reduced cost technique using a reusable retractor and thermal welding shears. The combination of reusable and disposable tools allows patients to benefit from endoscopic radial artery harvesting with decreased morbidity and favorable cosmetic results.

Background: Despite the many benefits of living donor kidney transplantation, economic consequences can result for donors. We reviewed studies which quantified the direct and indirect costs incurred by living kidney donors, in order to understand the strengths and limitations of existing literature., Methods: We identified relevant studies in MEDLINE, EMBASE and ECONOLIT bibliographic databases, in the Science Citation Index and study reference lists. Any study which reported at least one cost relevant to donors was included. The accuracy of abstracted data was verified by two reviewers and reported in year 2004 US dollars., Results: Thirty-five studies from 12 countries described costs incurred by individuals who donated between the years 1964 and 2003. No study comprehensively quantified all relevant expenses-the sum of select costs considered in one US study averaged Dollars 837 per donor and ranged from Dollars 0 to 28,906. Travel and/or accommodation costs were incurred by 9-99% of donors, and were higher in countries with a larger land mass. Post-discharge analgesics were required by 4-24% of donors, but prescription costs were not reported. Between 14 and 30% of donors incurred costs for lost income, with an average loss of Dollars 3386 in one study from the UK and Dollars 682 in another study from the Netherlands. Costs for dependent care were incurred by 9-44% of donors, while costs for domestic help were incurred by 8% of donors., Conclusions: Donors incur many types of costs attributable to kidney donation and the total costs are certainly higher than previously reported. To guide informed consent and fair reimbursement policies, further data on all relevant costs, preferably from a detailed prospective multi-centre cohort study, are required.

Objective: To determine whether sperm harvesting and cryopreservation at the time of vasectomy reversal is cost-effective., Design: Model of actual costs and results at five institutions., Setting: Multicenter study comprising five centers, including university hospitals and private practices., Patient(s): Men undergoing vasectomy reversal., Intervention(s): We established two models for vasectomy reversal. The first model was sperm harvesting and cryopreservation at the time of vasectomy reversal. The second model was sperm harvesting at the time of IVF only if the patient remained azoospermic after vasectomy reversal. Vasectomy reversal procedures modeled included bilateral vasovasostomy and bilateral epididymovasostomy. The costs for each procedure at the five institutions were collated and median costs determined., Main Outcome Measure(s): Median cost of procedure and calculated financial comparisons., Result(s): The median cost of testicular sperm extraction/cryopreservation performed at the time of bilateral vasovasostomy was $1,765 (range, $1,025-$2,800). The median cost of microsurgical epididymal sperm aspiration or testicular sperm extraction with cryopreservation performed at the time of epididymovasostomy was $1,209 (range, $905-$2,488). The average of the median costs for percutaneous sperm aspiration or testicular sperm aspiration for those patients with a failed vasectomy reversal was $725 (range, $400-$1,455)., Conclusion(s): Sperm retrieval with cryopreservation at the time of vasectomy reversal is not a cost-effective management strategy.

Objective: Compare two different techniques for laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy (LDN), related to the operative costs and learning curve., Materials and Methods: Between April/2000 and October/2003, 61 patients were submitted to LDN in 2 different reference centers in kidney transplantation. At center A (CA), 11 patients were operated by a pure transperitoneal approach, using Hem-O-Lok clips for the renal pedicle control and the specimens were retrieved manually, without using endobags. At center B (CB), 50 patients were also operated by a pure transperitoneal approach, but the renal pedicles were controlled with endo-GIA appliers and the specimens were retrieved using endobags., Results: Operative time (231 +/- 39 min vs. 179 +/- 30 min; p < 0.000), warm ischemia time (5.85 +/- 2.85 min vs. 3.84 +/- 3.84 min; p = 0.002) and blood loss (214 +/- 98 mL vs. 141 +/- 82 mL; p = 0.02) were statistically better in CB, when compared to CA. Discharge time was similar in both centers. One major complication was observed in both centers, leading to an open conversion in CA (9.1%). One donor death occurred in CB (2%). Regarding the recipients, no statistical difference was observed in all parameters analyzed. There was an economy of US$1.440 in each procedure performed in CA, when compared to CB., Conclusions: Despite the learning curve, the technique adopted by CA, showed no deleterious results to the donors and recipients when compared with the CB. On the other hand, this technique was cheaper than the technique performed in the CB, representing an attractive alternative for LDN, mainly in developing centers.

We report the results of a prospective, longitudinal quality of life survey on our adult right lobe (RL) liver donors. A total of 47 donors were enrolled; a standard SF-36 form and 43 questions developed by our team were completed before donation, at 1 week, and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after donation. There were no donor deaths. Twenty-nine complications occurred in 16 patients. Major complication rate was 12.8%. Employment status and personal finances were identified as major stressors. All donors who wished to return to work did so by 1 year (mean 3.4 months). Individuals reported between 0 dollars and 25,000 dollars in losses (wages, travel, lodging, etc.). Relationships with recipients and other family members were not altered significantly. Anticipated pain (predonation) was greater than actual pain reported. Donors indicated satisfaction with the donation process regardless of recipient outcome. Physical complaints were significant at 1 week and 1 month, but returned to baseline. Donor mental health remained stable. In conclusion, RL donors found the experience to be a positive one throughout the first postdonation year. The study identified areas (finances, employment and expected recipient outcomes) to be stressed as future donors are evaluated.

Purpose: We describe a minimally invasive, cost effective, and safe method of radial artery harvesting., Description: After obtaining informed consent and completing a preoperative evaluation, 169 radial arteries were harvested. Harvesting was accomplished through a 3-cm proximal mid forearm incision with exposure provided by a modified self-retaining lighted retractor., Evaluation: A total of 169 radial arteries were successfully harvested. The average incision length was 2.9 cm, radial artery length was 15.8 cm, and harvest time was 32.7 minutes. No trauma to the artery or graft spasm was evident. No procedure required conversion to an open technique. Superficial cellulitis occurred in 2 patients (1.2%) and wound infection in 1 (0.6%). Three patients (1.8%) experienced intermittent residual dysesthesia. All of the patients were highly satisfied with the excellent aesthetic results. This approach allowed for a substantial cost savings compared with other minimally invasive techniques., Conclusions: Direct minimally invasive radial artery harvesting is an acceptable alternative approach to radial artery harvesting. This method is safe, cost effective, easily reproducible, and aesthetically pleasing.

Currently, potential kidney transplant candidates are dying on the waiting list. One potential solution would be a regulated system of living kidney sales (with safeguards to protect the vendor). Potential objections and practical concerns are discussed.

Objective: To evaluate the cost of islet transplantation in type 1 diabetic patients with a functional renal graft in a multicenter network., Research Design and Methods: The study involved nine diabetic patients transplanted in the Swiss-French Groupe Rhône-Alpes, Rhin et Geneve pour la transplantation d'Ilots Langerhans (GRAGIL) consortium between March 1999 and June 2000. The direct medical costs were estimated from Social Security's perspective from the inclusion of the patient to 1 year after transplantation. All cost components were computed separately and included evaluation, screening and candidacy, organ retrieval, islet processing, pancreas and islet transportation, hospitalization for transplantation, follow-up, medications (immunosuppressive, antidiabetic, and adjuvant drugs), and adverse events requiring hospitalization., Results: During the study period, 56 pancreata were processed and 14 islet preparations were transplanted. The average cost of an islet transplantation (procedure and 1-year follow-up) was 77,745 euro (French rate, year 2000). The four main cost components were islet preparation (30% of the total cost), adverse events (24%), drugs (14%), and hospitalization (13%)., Conclusions: Overall costs of islet transplantation are slightly higher than those of pancreas transplantation. The cell isolation process is a critical point; a reduction in overall cost will require more efficient ways of isolating high yields of viable islets. Costs generated by shipments within the GRAGIL network did not represent an economic burden. It can be expected that the costs will decrease with growing experience and improving technology.