IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0192587.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic assessment of traditional surgical intervention versus use of a new innovative radiofrequency based surgical system in device replacements

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander Kypta
  • Hermann Blessberger
  • Juergen Kammler
  • Alexander Nahler
  • Kurt Neeser
  • Michael Lichtenauer
  • Christoph Edlinger
  • Joerg Kellermair
  • Daniel Kiblboeck
  • Thomas Lambert
  • Johannes Auer
  • Clemens Steinwender

Abstract

Introduction: Intra-operative complications like mechanical damages to the leads, infections and hematomas during generator replacements of implantable pacemakers and defibrillators contribute to additional costs for hospitals. The aim of this study was to evaluate operation room use, costs and budget impact of generator replacements using either a traditional surgical intervention (TSI) with scissors, scalpel and electrocautery vs. a new radiofrequency energy based surgical system, called PEAK PlasmaBladeTM (PPB). Materials and methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of a population including 508 patients with TSI and 254 patients with PPB who underwent generator replacement at the Kepler University Hospital in Linz or the St. Josef Hospital in Braunau, Austria. The economic analysis included costs of resources used for intra-operative complications (lead damages) and of procedure time for TSI vs. PPB. Results: Proportion of males, mean age and type of generator replaced were similar between the two groups. Lead damages occurred significantly more frequent with TSI than with PPB (5.3% and 0.4%; p

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Kypta & Hermann Blessberger & Juergen Kammler & Alexander Nahler & Kurt Neeser & Michael Lichtenauer & Christoph Edlinger & Joerg Kellermair & Daniel Kiblboeck & Thomas Lambert & Johannes Au, 2018. "Economic assessment of traditional surgical intervention versus use of a new innovative radiofrequency based surgical system in device replacements," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(3), pages 1-11, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0192587
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192587
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0192587
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0192587&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0192587?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0192587. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.