Advertisement

La radiologia medica

, Volume 117, Issue 4, pp 539–557 | Cite as

Cost-effectiveness of two breast biopsy procedures: surgical biopsy versus vacuum-assisted biopsy

  • C. A. PistoleseEmail author
  • A. Ciarrapico
  • T. Perretta
  • E. Cossu
  • F. della Gatta
  • S. Giura
  • C. Caramanica
  • G. Simonetti
Breast Radiology / Senologia

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare the costeffectiveness of two breast biopsy procedures: surgical biopsy and vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB).

Materials and methods

Between November 2008 and September 2009, 200 patients with suspicious breast lesions underwent biopsy procedures at our radiology department: 100 underwent VAB and 100 underwent surgical biopsy. 66 lesions were sampled under sonographic guidance, 109 under mammographic guidance and 25 under magnetic resonance guidance.

Results

All procedures were successfully completed. No significant differences in diagnostic efficacy were found between the biopsy procedures. Surgical biopsy has a higher unit cost compared with VAB.

Conclusions

Our analysis emphasises the benefits of VAB compared with surgical biopsy in terms of both costeffectiveness, and less invasiveness from a psychological and aesthetic point of view.

Keywords

Breast Vacuum-assisted breast biopsy Surgical biopsy Cost-effectiveness 

Confronto costi ed efficacia di due sistemi di biopsia mammaria: biopsia chirurgica vs. biopsia vuoto-assistita

Riassunto

Obiettivo

Scopo del presente lavoro è stato confrontare costi ed efficacia di due sistemi di biopsia mammaria: la biopsia chirurgica e quella vuoto-assistita (VAB).

Materiali e metodi

Presso il nostro centro, da novembre 2008 a settembre 2009, abbiamo selezionato 200 pazienti con lesioni mammarie sospette da sottoporre a caratterizzazione istologica, che è stata effettuata in 100/200 pazienti mediante prelievo VAB e nelle rimanenti 100/200 pazienti mediante biopsia chirurgica. Con entrambe le modalità bioptiche sono state sottoposte a prelievo 66 lesioni individuate sotto guida ecografica, 109 sotto guida mammografica e 25 reperti evidenziati sotto guida RM.

Risultati

Tutte le procedure considerate sono state portate a termine con successo. L’efficacia diagnostica dei due sistemi è risultata sovrapponibile. I costi unitari delle singole procedure risultano maggiori per la biopsia chirurgica rispetto alla procedura VAB.

Conclusioni

L’analisi da noi svolta ha evidenziato i vantaggi delle procedure VAB, rispetto alla biopsia chirurgica, sia in termini di costo-efficacia che in termini di minor invasività estetica e psicologica.

Parole chiave

Mammella Biopsia mammaria vuotoassistita Biopsia chirurgica Costo-efficacia 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References/Bibliografia

  1. 1.
    American Cancer Society (2011) Cancer Resource Center. http://www.cancer.org. Last access July 2011
  2. 2.
    Pfarl G, Helbich TH, Riedl CC et al (2002) Stereotactic 11-gauge vacuumassisted breast biopsy: a validation study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:1503–1507PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nori J, Cariti G, Masi A et al (2001) La microbiopsia istologica con ago da 14 Gauge nella diagnosi delle lesioni mammarie. Esperienza su 1000 casi. Radiol Med 101:31–38PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burkhardt JH, Sunshine JH (1999) Core-needle and surgical breast biopsy: comparison of three methods of assessing cost. Radiology 212:181–188PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pistolese CA, Ciarrapico AM, della Gatta F et al (2009) Cost-effectiveness analysis of two vacuum-assisted breast biopsy systems: Mammotome and Vacora. Radiol Med 114:743–756PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bazzocchi M, Facecchia I, Zuiani C et al (1999) Iperplasia duttale atipica della mammella. Diagnostica per immagini e ruolo dell’agobiopsia per cutanea con ago da 14 gauge. Radiol Med 98:133–137PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Giordano SH (2005) A review of the diagnosis and management of male breast cancer. Oncologist 10:471–479PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Westenend PJ, Jobse C (2002) Evaluation of fine-needle aspiration cytology of breast masses in males. Cancer 96:101–104PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Liberman L, Gougoutas CA, Zakowski MF et al (2001) Calcifications highly suggestive of malignancy: comparison of breast biopsy methods. AJR Am J Roentgenol 177:165–172PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Golub RM, Bennett CL, Stinson T et al (2004) Cost minimization study of image-guided core biopsy versus surgical excisional biopsy for women with abnormal mammograms. J Clin Oncol 22:2430–2437PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Helbich TH, Matzek W, Fushsjager MH (2004) Stereotactic and ultrasoundguided breast biopsy. Eur Radiol 14:383–393PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liberman L, Sama MP (2000) Costeffectiveness of stereotactic 11-gauge directional vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 175:53–58PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sujata V Ghate, Rosen EL, Scott C Soo et al (2006) MRI-guided vacuumassisted breast biopsy with a handheld portable biopsy system. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1733–1736PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Simon JR, Kalbhen CL, Cooper RA, Flisak ME (2000) Accuracy and complication rates of US-guided vacuum-assisted core breast biopsy: initial results. Radiology 215:694–697PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Orel SG, Rosen M, Mies C, Schnall MD (2006) MR imaging-guided 9-gauge vacuum-assisted core-needle breast biopsy: initial experience. Radiology 238:54–61PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brenna A (1999) Manuale di economia sanitaria. CSI, MilanoGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Casati G (1996) Manuale di contabilità direzionale nelle aziende sanitarie. EGEA, MilanoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. A. Pistolese
    • 1
    Email author
  • A. Ciarrapico
    • 2
  • T. Perretta
    • 1
  • E. Cossu
    • 1
  • F. della Gatta
    • 1
  • S. Giura
    • 1
  • C. Caramanica
    • 1
  • G. Simonetti
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Imaging Molecolare, Radiologia Interventistica e Terapia RadianteUniversità degli Studi di Roma “Tor Vergata” (PTV)RomeItaly
  2. 2.Dipartimento di Sanità Pubblica e Biologia CellulareUniversità degli Studi di Roma “Tor Vergata” (PTV)RomeItaly

Personalised recommendations