Post by account_disabled on Aug 30, 2023 6:46:01 GMT
Specimen radiography made no difference – at least in our hands. We published these data in the American Journal of Surgery, with the belief that this was an important contribution to the literature, albeit a negative result. We did not see this as failure, but rather the finding of another way of reducing positive margins that didn’t work.
And so the search for better ways of doing partial mastectomies Switzerland Mobile Number List continued. We then conducted the SHAVE trial which found that excising cavity shave margins at the time of partial mastectomy for breast cancer could reduce positive margin rates by 50 percent.
This was a highly significant result, both statistically and clinically, which was then published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
After this landmark publication, there was much anticipation that this technique would also result in significant cost savings. Our study was not powered to evaluate cost. When we looked at this endpoint, we found that the technique saved roughly $750 per patient, but that this did not reach statistical significance. Does this make the finding irrelevant? I think not.
While the p-value was more than 0.05, the saving of $750 per patient when multiplied by hundreds of thousands of patients diagnosed with this disease annually in this country may be of tremendous importance, particularly in the current era of healthcare reform. Thankfully, the editors at Annals of Surgery agreed, and published these findings as well.
And so the search for better ways of doing partial mastectomies Switzerland Mobile Number List continued. We then conducted the SHAVE trial which found that excising cavity shave margins at the time of partial mastectomy for breast cancer could reduce positive margin rates by 50 percent.
This was a highly significant result, both statistically and clinically, which was then published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
After this landmark publication, there was much anticipation that this technique would also result in significant cost savings. Our study was not powered to evaluate cost. When we looked at this endpoint, we found that the technique saved roughly $750 per patient, but that this did not reach statistical significance. Does this make the finding irrelevant? I think not.
While the p-value was more than 0.05, the saving of $750 per patient when multiplied by hundreds of thousands of patients diagnosed with this disease annually in this country may be of tremendous importance, particularly in the current era of healthcare reform. Thankfully, the editors at Annals of Surgery agreed, and published these findings as well.