RESUMO
PURPOSE: This study was done to assess the clinical-diagnostic impact and cost of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) versus computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in the characterisation of focal liver lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CEUS with sulphur hexafluoride-filled microbubbles (SonoVue bolus 2.4 ml) was performed in 157 patients with 160 focal liver lesions identified by other diagnostic techniques. CEUS images were obtained during the arterial (15 to 35 s from contrast injection), portal venous (40 to 70 s) and late phase (up to 300 s from microbubble injection). Contrast-enhanced CT was performed with a 64-row multidetector CT. MRI was performed before and after administration of the liver-specific contrast agent gadobenate dimeglumine (Gd-BOPTA). A patient-by-patient activity-based cost analysis was performed. RESULTS: CEUS led to a change in the diagnostic workup in 131/157 patients (83.4 %) and in the therapeutic workup in 93/157 patients (59.2 %). CEUS allowed for the final diagnosis to be established in 133/157 patients (84.7 %). The full cost of CEUS was lower than that of contrast-enhanced CT and MR imaging. CONCLUSIONS: CEUS determined a change in the diagnostic and therapeutic workup in the characterisation of focal liver lesions and reduced the full costs of the diagnostic process. MAIN MESSAGES: ⢠CEUS allows a correct diagnosis in more than 80 % of focal liver lesions. ⢠CEUS has a significant impact on the diagnosis of focal liver lesions. ⢠CEUS examination of focal liver lesions reduces total costs. ⢠Dynamic MR with hepato-specific contrast medium remains the reference standard for lesion characterisation. ⢠CEUS is low-cost, versatile and accurate in the characterisation of focal liver lesions.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate diagnostic imaging costs before and after DTS implementation in patients with suspected thoracic lesions on CXR. METHODS: Four hundred sixty-five patients (263 male, 202 female; age, 72.47 ± 11.33 years) with suspected thoracic lesion(s) after CXR underwent DTS. Each patient underwent CT when a pulmonary non-calcified lesion was identified by DTS while CT was not performed when a benign pulmonary or extrapulmonary lesion or pseudolesion was identified. The average per-patient imaging cost was calculated by normalising the costs before and after DTS implementation. RESULTS: In 229/465 patients who underwent DTS after suspicious CXR, DTS showed 193 pulmonary lesions and 36 pleural lesions, while in the remaining 236/465 patients, lesions were ruled out as pseudolesions of CXR. Chest CT examination was performed in 127/465 (27 %) patients while in the remaining 338/465 patients (73 %) CXR doubtful findings were resolved by DTS. The average per-patient costs of CXR, DTS and CT were
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Our aim was to evaluate the economic impact of equipment failures in a radiology department with a view to guiding maintenance policy decisions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We assessed the negative economic impact caused by the interruption of activity of a radiodiagnostics section due to equipment failure, taking into account: the effects occurring during the first day of equipment down-time (assuming that the equipment failure occurs in the middle of the shift) and the effects during the following days until the repair of the failure; the effects occurring in the short- and long-term. To exemplify the negative impact of inactivity due to equipment failure, we chose three radiology sections with different levels of technological and operational complexity (chest radiology, gastrointestinal radiology and remote-controlled diagnostics). For each, we evaluated the loss of contribution margin and the idle capacity costs (short- and long-term impact). RESULTS: The negative economic effects were: for thoracic radiology, 496,77 Euro in the first day, and 30,99 Euro from the second day onwards; for gastrointestinal radiology, 526,40 Euro for the first day, and 730,39 Euro from the second day onwards; for remote-controlled diagnostics, 786,25 Euro for the first day, and 927,67 Euro from the second days onwards. DISCUSSION: Our results indicate that the level of idle capacity costs (mainly equipment and staff) increases with the complexity of the equipment, whereas the contribution margin appears to fluctuate, because the charges are state-imposed and do not vary with the complexity of equipment. Moreover, our analysis shows that if the workload of a broken machine can easily be assigned to an additional shift using another machine, losses are considerably reduced from the second day onwards. Once the negative economic impact of equipment failures has been evaluated, the second step is to choose the best kind of maintenance. CONCLUSIONS: A sound calculation of the economic impact of equipment failures is very useful for guiding the head of department and the hospital manager in deciding whether to purchase maintenance services (or a long-term guarantee) from the equipment manufacturer, to set up an auxiliary centre for maintenance and repair, or to purchase a third-party maintenance contract.
