Cost-effectiveness analysis of 3-D computerized tomography colonography versus optical colonoscopy for imaging symptomatic gastroenterology patients.

BACKGROUND: When symptomatic gastroenterology patients have an indication for colonic imaging, clinicians have a choice between optical colonoscopy (OC) and computerized tomography colonography with three-dimensional reconstruction (3-D CTC). 3-D CTC provides a minimally invasive and rapid evaluation of the entire colon, and it can be an efficient modality for diagnosing symptoms. It allows for a more targeted use of OC, which is associated with a higher risk of major adverse events and higher procedural costs. A case can be made for 3-D CTC as a primary test for colonic imaging followed if necessary by targeted therapeutic OC; however, the relative long-term costs and benefits of introducing 3-D CTC as a first-line investigation are unknown. AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of 3-D CTC versus OC for colonic imaging of symptomatic gastroenterology patients in the UK NHS. METHODS: We used a Markov model to follow a cohort of 100,000 symptomatic gastroenterology patients, aged 50 years or older, and estimate the expected lifetime outcomes, life years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs (£, 2010-2011) associated with 3-D CTC and OC. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the base-case cost-effectiveness results to variation in input parameters and methodological assumptions. RESULTS: 3D-CTC provided a similar number of LYs (7.737 vs 7.739) and QALYs (7.013 vs 7.018) per individual compared with OC, and it was associated with substantially lower mean costs per patient (£467 vs £583), leading to a positive incremental net benefit. After accounting for the overall uncertainty, the probability of 3-D CTC being cost effective was around 60 %, at typical willingness-to-pay values of £20,000-£30,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSION: 3-D CTC is a cost-saving and cost-effective option for colonic imaging of symptomatic gastroenterology patients compared with OC

Usefulness of bronchoalveolar lavage in suspect COVID-19 repeatedly negative swab test and interstitial lung disease

The diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) relies on nasopharyngeal swab, which shows a 20–30% risk of false negativity [1]. Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) is reported to be useful in patients with pulmonary interstitial infiltrates on high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT). We investigated the usefulness of BAL in symptomatic patients with positive HRCT and a repeatedly negative swab test (‘grey zone’)

Bioreactors as engineering support to treat cardiac muscle and vascular disease

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the Western World. The inability of fully differentiated, load-bearing cardiovascular tissues to in vivo regenerate and the limitations of the current treatment therapies greatly motivate the efforts of cardiovascular tissue engineering to become an effective clinical strategy for injured heart and vessels. For the effective production of organized and functional cardiovascular engineered constructs in vitro, a suitable dynamic environment is essential, and can be achieved and maintained within bioreactors. Bioreactors are technological devices that, while monitoring and controlling the culture environment and stimulating the construct, attempt to mimic the physiological milieu. In this study, a review of the current state of the art of bioreactor solutions for cardiovascular tissue engineering is presented, with emphasis on bioreactors and biophysical stimuli adopted for investigating the mechanisms influencing cardiovascular tissue development, and for eventually generating suitable cardiovascular tissue replacements

Biofluid Biomarkers in Huntington's Disease

Huntington's disease (HD) is a chronic progressive neurodegenerative condition where new markers of disease progression are needed. So far no disease-modifying interventions have been found, and few interventions have been proven to alleviate symptoms. This may be partially explained by the lack of reliable indicators of disease severity, progression, and phenotype.Biofluid biomarkers may bring advantages in addition to clinical measures, such as reliability, reproducibility, price, accuracy, and direct quantification of pathobiological processes at the molecular level; and in addition to empowering clinical trials, they have the potential to generate useful hypotheses for new drug development.In this chapter we review biofluid biomarker reports in HD, emphasizing those we feel are likely to be closest to clinical applicability