A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Comparing the VivaSight Double-Lumen Tube and a Conventional Double-Lumen Tube in Adult Patients Undergoing Thoracic Surgery Involving One-Lung Ventilation

Overview

Journal Pharmacoecon Open

Date 2019 Jul 13

PMID 31297752

Citations 10

Authors

Sara Larsen

Jimmy Hojberg Holm

Tove Norgaard Sauer

Claus Andersen

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: One-lung ventilation (OLV) procedures are essential for most thoracic surgeries, and the most common method is intubation with a conventional double-lumen tube (cDLT) and bronchoscopy to verify correct tube placement.

Objective: The objective of this study was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the VivaSight double-lumen tube (DL) and a cDLT for OLV procedures.

Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from a healthcare sector perspective in Denmark using a decision analytic model to assess the potential effects and costs of using VivaSight-DL as an alternative to a cDLT with a reusable bronchoscope. Costs were determined using a micro-costing approach. The effectiveness measure was the number of times that fiberoptic confirmation of the tube placement during intubation or surgery was unnecessary and thus avoided. The effectiveness input was from a randomized controlled trial (n = 52). Both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the results.

Results: Fiberoptic confirmation of tube placement was only necessary in two (6.66%) procedures using VivaSight-DL. The cost of using VivaSight-DL was $US299.96 per procedure versus $US347.61 for a cDLT with a reusable bronchoscope. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was - $US51.06 per bronchoscopy avoided. The base-case analysis indicated that the use of VivaSight-DL was cost effective compared with the use of a cDLT with reusable bronchoscope. Sensitivity analyses showed that the results were robust and that VivaSight-DL was more effective and less costly.

Conclusion: This study suggests that VivaSight-DL is associated with cost savings and reductions in bronchoscope use to verify correct tube placement. The conclusion is based on the results from a single institution. To clarify whether VivaSight-DL is cost effective in larger or global clinical settings, further economic evaluations should be performed.

Citing Articles

Video double-lumen tube for one lung ventilation: implementation and experience in 343 cases of routine clinical use during the first 20 months of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Irouschek A, Schmidt J, Birkholz T, Sirbu H, Moritz A J Cardiothorac Surg. 2024; 19(1):218.

PMID: 38627789 PMC: 11020909. DOI: 10.1186/s13019-024-02663-5.

The video double-lumen tube: does it have a future?.

Marchant B, Morris B, Royster R J Thorac Dis. 2023; 15(5):2385-2388.

PMID: 37324104 PMC: 10267942. DOI: 10.21037/jtd-23-309.

Video double-lumen tubes: how much room for improvement can they provide?.

Lopez-Lopez D, Neira-Somoza P, Mato-Bua R, Pato-Lopez O J Thorac Dis. 2023; 15(3):960-963.

PMID: 37065593 PMC: 10089832. DOI: 10.21037/jtd-23-70.

Hypoxemia in thoracoscopic lung resection surgery using a video double-lumen tube versus a conventional double-lumen tube: A propensity score-matched analysis.

Wang W, Gong Z, Zhao M, Zhang Z, Qiu Y, Jiang Q Front Surg. 2023; 10:1090233.

PMID: 36874459 PMC: 9982010. DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2023.1090233.

A randomized comparison between the VivaSight double-lumen tube and standard double-lumen tube intubation in thoracic surgery patients.

Palaczynski P, Misiolek H, Bialka S, Owczarek A, Gola W, Szarpak L J Thorac Dis. 2022; 14(10):3903-3914.

PMID: 36389329 PMC: 9641341. DOI: 10.21037/jtd-22-451.

References

Heir J, Guo S, Purugganan R, Jackson T, Sekhon A, Mirza K . A Randomized Controlled Study of the Use of Video Double-Lumen Endobronchial Tubes Versus Double-Lumen Endobronchial Tubes in Thoracic Surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2017; 32(1):267-274. DOI: 10.1053/j.jvca.2017.05.016. View

Tvede M, Kristensen M, Nyhus-Andreasen M . A cost analysis of reusable and disposable flexible optical scopes for intubation. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2012; 56(5):577-84. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2012.02653.x. View

Saracoglu A, Saracoglu K . VivaSight: a new era in the evolution of tracheal tubes. J Clin Anesth. 2016; 33:442-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2016.04.034. View

Gupta D, Wang H . Cost-effectiveness analysis of flexible optical scopes for tracheal intubation: a descriptive comparative study of reusable and single-use scopes. J Clin Anesth. 2011; 23(8):632-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2011.04.007. View

Schuepbach R, Grande B, Camen G, Schmidt A, Fischer H, Sessler D . Intubation with VivaSight or conventional left-sided double-lumen tubes: a randomized trial. Can J Anaesth. 2015; 62(7):762-9. DOI: 10.1007/s12630-015-0329-8. View

Terjesen C, Kovaleva J, Ehlers L . Early Assessment of the Likely Cost Effectiveness of Single-Use Flexible Video Bronchoscopes. Pharmacoecon Open. 2018; 1(2):133-141. PMC: 5691847. DOI: 10.1007/s41669-017-0012-9. View

Weinstein M, Siegel J, Gold M, Kamlet M, Russell L . Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA. 1996; 276(15):1253-8. View

Weinstein M, OBrien B, Hornberger J, Jackson J, Johannesson M, McCabe C . Principles of good practice for decision analytic modeling in health-care evaluation: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Good Research Practices--Modeling Studies. Value Health. 2003; 6(1):9-17. DOI: 10.1046/j.1524-4733.2003.00234.x. View

Krage R, van Rijn C, van Groeningen D, Loer S, Schwarte L, Schober P . Cormack-Lehane classification revisited. Br J Anaesth. 2010; 105(2):220-7. DOI: 10.1093/bja/aeq136. View

10.

Purohit A, Bhargava S, Mangal V, Parashar V . Lung isolation, one-lung ventilation and hypoxaemia during lung isolation. Indian J Anaesth. 2015; 59(9):606-17. PMC: 4613408. DOI: 10.4103/0019-5049.165855. View

11.

Massot J, Dumand-Nizard V, Fischler M, Le Guen M . Evaluation of the Double-Lumen Tube Vivasight-DL (DLT-ETView): A Prospective Single-Center Study. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2015; 29(6):1544-9. DOI: 10.1053/j.jvca.2015.04.031. View

12.

Kovaleva J . Infectious complications in gastrointestinal endoscopy and their prevention. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2016; 30(5):689-704. DOI: 10.1016/j.bpg.2016.09.008. View

13.

Heir J, Purugganan R, Jackson T, Norman P, Cata J, Kosturakis A . A retrospective evaluation of the use of video-capable double-lumen endotracheal tubes in thoracic surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2014; 28(4):870-2. DOI: 10.1053/j.jvca.2013.11.011. View

14.

Klein U, Karzai W, Bloos F, Wohlfarth M, Gottschall R, Fritz H . Role of fiberoptic bronchoscopy in conjunction with the use of double-lumen tubes for thoracic anesthesia: a prospective study. Anesthesiology. 1998; 88(2):346-50. DOI: 10.1097/00000542-199802000-00012. View

15.

Sato R, Gomez Rey G, Nelson S, Pinsky B . Community-acquired pneumonia episode costs by age and risk in commercially insured US adults aged ≥50 years. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2013; 11(3):251-8. PMC: 3663984. DOI: 10.1007/s40258-013-0026-0. View

16.

Kovaleva J, Peters F, van der Mei H, Degener J . Transmission of infection by flexible gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2013; 26(2):231-54. PMC: 3623380. DOI: 10.1128/CMR.00085-12. View

17.

Ofstead C, Heymann O, Quick M, Johnson E, Eiland J, Wetzler H . The effectiveness of sterilization for flexible ureteroscopes: A real-world study. Am J Infect Control. 2017; 45(8):888-895. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2017.03.016. View

18.

Koopman E, Barak M, Weber E, Valk M, de Schepper R, Bouwman R . Evaluation of a new double-lumen endobronchial tube with an integrated camera (VivaSight-DL(™) ): a prospective multicentre observational study. Anaesthesia. 2015; 70(8):962-8. DOI: 10.1111/anae.13068. View

19.

Macario A . What does one minute of operating room time cost?. J Clin Anesth. 2010; 22(4):233-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2010.02.003. View

20.

Donn S, Kuhns L . Mechanism of endotracheal tube movement with change of head position in the neonate. Pediatr Radiol. 1980; 9(1):37-40. DOI: 10.1007/BF00973968. View