ATS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Author home page(s):
François Clement
Sidney Chocron
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Falcoz, P.-E.
Right arrow Articles by Etievent, J.-P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Falcoz, P.-E.
Right arrow Articles by Etievent, J.-P.
Related Collections
Right arrow Lung - other

Ann Thorac Surg 2003;76:1843-1848
© 2003 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

Original article: general thoracic

Management of the second episode of spontaneous pneumothorax: a decision analysis

Pierre-Emmanuel Falcoz, MDa*, Christine Binquet, MDb, François Clement, MDa, Djamel Kaili, MDa, Catherine Quantin, MD, PhDb, Sidney Chocron, MD, PhDa, Joseph-Philippe Etievent, MDa

a Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Jean-Minjoz Hospital, Besançon, France
b Department of Biostatistics, University Hospital, Dijon, France

Accepted for publication June 3, 2003.

* Address reprint requests to Dr Falcoz, Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Hôpital Jean-Minjoz, Boulevard Fleming, 25000 Besançon, France
e-mail: pierre-emmanuel.falcoz{at}wanadoo.fr


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Introduction
 Material and methods
 Results
 Comment
 Acknowledgments
 References
 
BACKGROUND: Optimal management for patients presenting a second episode of spontaneous pneumothorax remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare two possible treatment strategies, video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) and conservative management, in order to assess which of the two was better adapted for the treatment of the second episode of spontaneous pneumothorax.

METHODS: The authors propose a decision analytic model including a cost-effectiveness study to compare two clinical strategies: VATS (reference strategy) and conservative management (alternative strategy). Data were obtained from a Medline search for English language articles and cost estimates were derived from the financial and public health departments of our hospital. The model was analyzed to determine the baseline strategy leading to the highest expected effectiveness and the lowest expected cost.

RESULTS: Conservative management offered a slight advantage in expected effectiveness value (99.99 vs 99.93 for VATS). VATS produced the lowest expected cost (€4347 vs €7536 for conservative management). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €57,750. Within the ranges tested, the sensitivity analysis presented consistent results in terms of effectiveness and advocated conservative management as the best strategy. In terms of cost, with the exception of length of stay, the sensitivity analysis was insensitive in estimating the different probabilities, and favored VATS over conservative management.

CONCLUSIONS: In the management of the second episode of spontaneous pneumothorax, VATS offers substantial savings in cost for only a slight decrease in effectiveness, when compared with conservative management.


   Introduction
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
Material and methods
 Results
 Comment
 Acknowledgments
 References
 
Spontaneous pneumothorax (SP) is a disabling disorder that may present either in young and otherwise healthy patients (primary pneumothorax) or as a complication of an underlying lung disease (secondary pneumothorax). Since the 1960s clinical trials have led to opposing recommendations for management of SP, an issue still under debate particularly for the management of the second episode.

Conservative management (CM) has long been the generally accepted treatment strategy for the second episode of SP (pleural drainage and a "wait and see" approach) [1, 2]. Thanks to advances in thoracoscopic instrumentation (such as optics, instruments, and endoscopic staplers) treatment strategy has progressively changed since the early 1990s, and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) has set a new standard of excellence for treating the second episode of SP [3–5].

Nevertheless, there is still controversy as to what the best strategy is for a patient presenting a second episode of SP. The answer to this question remains unclear due to the lack of controlled clinical trials comparing the two possible treatment strategies. We propose a decision analytic model to examine this clinically important issue.

The aim of this study was to compare two possible treatment strategies, VATS and CM, in order to assess which of the two was better adapted for the treatment of the second episode of SP.


   Material and methods
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Material and methods
Results
 Comment
 Acknowledgments
 References
 
The model
This study was conducted using a decision analysis design. Decision analysis is a quantitative method for synthesizing data from numerous sources to evaluate treatment alternatives [6]. All decision analyses involve the following basic components: the alternative strategies and potential outcomes associated with each strategy are specified in the decision model; the probabilities for each of these outcomes are estimated from the most appropriate available data and assigned to each decision point in the model; and an analysis is performed to calculate the expected value of each treatment alternative. By calculating the expected value, a favored strategy is identified. All analyses were performed with Data version 3.5 (TreeAge Software Inc, Williamstown, MA), a decision analysis software program. The decision tree used in this analysis is illustrated in Figure 1.



View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Fig 1. Decision trees representing the choice of management strategies for the second episode of spontaneous pneumothorax. The two clinical strategies to be chosen from are represented at the square decision node of the first tree (A). The probabilities and estimates of their values are listed in Table 1. {square} = the choice between strategies (decision node); {circ} = the occurrence of chance events (chance node); and {triangleleft} = a logic check in the simulation (terminal node). (CM = conservative management; VATS = video-assisted thoracic surgery.)

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1. Literature-Based Range of Probabilities Comparing VATS With Conservative Management

 
In the present study, the outcomes of each strategy were examined both in terms of effectiveness and cost. By performing a cost-effectiveness analysis, we obtained a more integrated view of the decision-making issue. Thus, the model was analyzed to determine the baseline strategy that leads to the highest expected effectiveness and lowest expected cost.

The financial impact of the management of the second episode of SP may be considered from different perspectives, for example: the physician's time or health-care costs. Our model looks at financial impact from the national health insurance perspective. Because it was not possible to determine real costs, only direct costs were taken into account. No attempt was made to include noninstitutional costs, either direct or indirect, born by the patients and their families or by society.

Assumptions
In designing the decision tree, several assumptions were made in order to simplify the analysis. Complications that followed an episode of SP were categorized into three groups, regardless of the chosen treatment strategy: short-term (less than 1 month), medium-term (less than 3 months), and long-term (less than 2 years). All potential complications were considered either as imperfect results or major complications. Imperfect results were: minor air leak, pleural effusion, incomplete reexpansion of the lung (failing pleurodesis), and short-term ipsilateral recurrent pneumothorax. Major complications were: hemothorax or pleural infection following surgery or chest tube insertion, prolonged air leak, and middle- and long-term ipsilateral recurrent pneumothorax. For each VATS, the probability of conversion to thoracotomy was taken into account.

Utility and probabilities of chance events
The concept of utility is a measure of a decision maker's relative preference for an outcome state. Each of the health states at the terminal nodes of the decision tree, which represent the final outcomes, are thus assigned a utility value that quantifies preferences for these states [7]. In the context of the present decision tree, the final outcomes under study were either definitive resolution or ensuing complications. They were estimated over a 2-year period because most recurrences occur during the first 2 years after the initial pneumothorax [8]. The utility of a patient having a definitive resolution, which is the optimal outcome, was assigned a value of 100. The utility of a patient experiencing a course with ensuing complications was assigned a value of 0.

Table 1 summarizes the main data probabilities and estimates of their values used in the decision analysis. These values are based on a critical review of the available literature regarding SP management. We performed a systematic Medline search for all English language articles dating from 1966 and falling under the medical subject headings "spontaneous pneumothorax," "pleural drainage," "thoracoscopy," and "video-assisted thoracic surgery" alone and in combination with the terms "randomized controlled trials," "meta-analysis," and "guidelines." This survey of the medical literature was done to obtain a baseline value and a range for all variables of interest. Decision tree values were assigned by applying critical appraisal criteria (methodologic quality, largest number of cases reported, most recent information, and relevance to our study population) in the articles retrieved [9].

Cost data
Costs, expressed in euros (€), were provided by the financial department of our hospital. They are those of the actual procedures for pneumothorax. The total cost of both surgical and anesthetic procedures was taken into account. The anesthetic cost was €188.1 for VATS and thoracotomy, and €20.9 for CM. The surgical cost was €418 for VATS and thoracotomy, and €41.8 for CM. The cost per day of hospitalization was €584.19 (ranging from €416.93 to €724.03).

The public health department provided the mean and standard deviation of length of stay over a 5-year period (1998 to 2002) of 133 patients suffering a second episode of SP: 5.4 ± 1.8 days for VATS (n = 82 patients), 10.5 ± 3.5 days for thoracotomy (n = 17 patients), and 9.4 ± 6.9 days for CM (n = 34 patients).

Sensitivity analysis
The stability of the results obtained from the model for mean probabilities and costs was assessed through sensitivity analysis. Sensitivity analysis is a method of varying probabilities over a defined range to determine how the optimal choice would change if the value of a chance event changed [10].[11–24] Sensitivity analysis can be performed on individual probabilities (one-way sensitivity analysis) or by varying two probabilities at the same time (two-way sensitivity analysis). One-way sensitivity analysis was performed for each probability in the decision tree, and the value at which the optimal strategy changed (threshold value) was identified. Two-way sensitivity analysis was performed for all probabilities found to be relevant in one-way sensitivity analysis.


   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Material and methods
 Results
Comment
 Acknowledgments
 References
 
Baseline analysis
The baseline analysis (Table 2) was based on the assumptions described above and used the aforementioned probabilities (Table 1), costs estimates, and formalized utility scores.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 2. Summary of Baseline Results Comparing VATS With Conservative Management

 
Conservative management offered a slight increase in expected effectiveness as compared to VATS. The incremental effectiveness, obtained by calculating the difference between the expected effectiveness values associated with the two strategies, was 0.06. This value indicates that CM would have provided six additional recoveries for 10,000 patients. Similarly, when focusing on the hierarchical choice between VATS and thoracotomy, our analysis suggests that VATS would have provided 95 additional recoveries for 10,000 patients undergoing surgery.

The strategy producing the lowest expected cost was VATS. The cost-effectiveness ratio for one recovery was €44 for VATS and €75 for CM. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €57,750 for CM, which means that the cost of one additional recovery by CM, when compared to VATS, was €57,750.

Sensitivity analysis
Because the probabilities for the various outcomes used in this analysis could conceivably vary, sensitivity testing was performed to assess the validity of the conclusions over a wide range of probabilities.

In terms of effectiveness, the sensitivity analysis demonstrated consistent results and advocated CM as the better of the two strategies regardless of the probability concerned. Within the ranges tested, the different variables in the model influenced the weight of VATS, but did not change the preferred strategy. Examples are given in Figure 2, which illustrates the effect of definitive resolution after VATS (Fig 2A) and the effect of definitive resolution after CM (Fig 2B) on the two management strategies.



View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Fig 2. One-way sensitivity analysis demonstrating the effect of different variables in terms of effectiveness and cost. The upper graphs illustrate the effect of definitive resolution after VATS (A) and after CM (B) on expected effectiveness. The lower graphs illustrate the effect of length of stay for VATS (C) and for CM (2 d) on expected cost (D). The threshold value at which strategies were equivalent was 4.9 days. {blacksquare} = CM; {circ} = VATS. (CM = conservative management; T = threshold value; VATS = video-assisted thoracic surgery.)

 
In terms of costs, the sensitivity analysis was insensitive to changes in the estimate of the values, except for length of stay, and favored VATS over CM for the treatment of the second episode of SP. One-way sensitivity analysis for VATS did not reveal any threshold (Fig 2C). One-way sensitivity analysis for CM revealed that the threshold value at which strategies were equivalent for length of stay was 4.9 days (Fig 2D). Two-way sensitivity analysis indicated how the optimal strategy changed as the length of stay related to each strategy varied (Fig 3). A combination of these two lengths of stay corresponds to a point on the graph. For any combination, if the point lies in the black area, VATS is the optimal choice and in the white area, it is CM. The boundary line between the two areas represents a series of threshold values at which the two strategies yield an equivalent outcome.



View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Fig 3. Two-way sensitivity analysis of the relation between the length of stay for VATS and CM that illustrates how the optimal strategy changes according to the length of stay when all other probabilities are maintained at the baseline. The black area indicates VATS as the preferred strategy; the white area indicates CM as the preferred strategy. The base-case scenario, indicated by a star, is defined by a mean length of stay of 5.4 days for VATS and 9.4 days for CM. (CM = conservative management; VATS = video-assisted thoracic surgery.)

 

   Comment
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Material and methods
 Results
 Comment
Acknowledgments
 References
 
In the field of SP, a consensus emerging in the literature indicates clearly what to do for an initial episode of SP (CM) or the third episode (VATS). Conversely, the need for and method of promoting adequate pleural symphysis at the second episode has given rise to great controversy. The usefulness of VATS as opposed to CM for the second episode of SP remains controversial. Although some centers recommend VATS [5, 19, 25], others, who report a high recurrence and complication rate and recommend more caution [1, 2], advocate CM. Clearly there is still much debate over which approach is more appropriate in any given patient. The British Thoracic Society [26] and the American College of Chest Physicians [27] have both published guidelines for the immediate and subsequent management of patients with SP. On one hand, the guidelines of the British Thoracic Society make no distinction between patients with first and recurrent episodes of SP. On the other hand, most of the panel members of the American College of Chest Physicians recommend VATS at the second episode. Because a consensus has not been clearly established from these basic recommendations, even among experts, and given the lack of controlled clinical trials, we decided to address this controversial question using formal decision analysis.

The use of decision analysis in surgery is gaining interest [28, 29]. In a complex decision-making environment, where medical practice is influenced by published clinical trials, consensus statements and detailed formal examination of procedures, physicians may perform inadequately in establishing the standard of care if they rely only on their clinical judgment based uniquely on past experience. Since none of us can intuitively estimate probabilities accurately, decision analysis becomes useful when it is desirable to compare alternative treatment strategies quantitatively. Nevertheless, this method has its own limitations. Some of the limitations of our decision analysis imposed by the assumptions and tree structure deserve mention. First, the possibility of having to perform a thoracotomy was taken into account. We decided not to exclude this option from our model in order to leave the surgeon the choice of which technique he judged the more appropriate to treat a major complication (eg, hemothorax). Second, we used estimated costs of the actual procedures for SP to compare the cost of the two strategies. The ideal approach would have been to look at the real cost of each procedure and model those costs explicitly. Such a cost analysis was beyond the scope of the current work and not really justified in a comparative study.

Despite the above limitations from the standpoint of baseline probabilities, our analysis reveals only a slight advantage in terms of expected effectiveness for CM. The difference we take into account in our analysis between CM and VATS (incremental effectiveness value of 0.06) may be somewhat disturbing to readers. This value is rather small and, consequently, the difference between the two strategies is only slight. However, from the perspective of decision analysis, it is not the quantity but the sense of the difference between two treatment strategies that guides the choice of the decision [6]. It is especially noteworthy that sensitivity analysis did not have a significant impact on the baseline results. In the absence of variation in the sensitivity analysis, the interpretation of results can be considered reliable and robust. In addition, although the primary goal of this study was to compare two possible treatment strategies, VATS and CM, in the management of a second episode of SP, the present model also provides information for a hierarchical choice between VATS and thoracotomy, keeping in mind that thoracotomy is often reserved for patients with technically more complex problems. Be that as it may, VATS would have provided 95 additional recoveries for 10,000 patients undergoing surgery for a second episode of SP. Hence, it should be considered whenever surgery is necessary. This finding has already been reported in many studies dealing with VATS versus thoracotomy for SP [19, 24, 27], especially in primary SP [25].

In the present study, VATS was the strategy found to produce the lowest expected cost. This result was principally due to a shorter "cost-consuming" length of stay. Schramel and colleagues [30] highlighted this in a cost analysis study comparing VATS and CM. The length of stay for VATS was 5.4 ± 1.8 days in our study, 6.9 days (ranging from 2 to 15 days) in Crisci and Coloni's study [31], whereas it was 11 ± 4 days in Schramel associates' study [30] and 2.9 ± 0.9 in Hazelrigg and coworkers' study [32]. In considering the discordance in the length of stay between these studies (postoperative length of stay for European patients is typically much longer than for US patients) it was necessary to examine the impact on the results of these variations in duration. By varying the length of stay for CM, the one-way sensitivity analysis revealed that the threshold value at which outcomes were equivalent was 4.9 days. CM should be preferred below this threshold value, and VATS above it. The two-way sensitivity analysis indicates the preferred strategy in function of the mean length of stay (Fig 3). The shorter the length of stay for VATS, the smaller the area in which CM was the optimal strategy. Therefore, depending on the length of stay in a given institution, the clinician may well choose one strategy or the other.

Cost effectiveness is becoming more and more important in the choice of treatment. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio found in our study was approximately €58,000 for CM. Deciding whether a strategy is cost effective is a subjective interpretation of the cost-effectiveness ratio. Although there is no absolute cutoff level, there is a consensus that a cost-effectiveness ratio under the accepted limit of €50,000 corresponds to a cost-effective strategy [33]. Hence, CM is definitely not cost effective for the management of the second episode of SP in our study.

In conclusion, the results we obtained using decision analysis for the management of the second episode of SP reveal that VATS offers substantial savings in cost for only a slight decrease in effectiveness when compared with CM. Institutions whose probabilities reflect those presented in our analysis may well want to consider performing VATS in all patients undergoing a second episode of SP. Nevertheless, further clinical trials should help to validate the formal analytic results found in this study.


   Acknowledgments
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Material and methods
 Results
 Comment
 Acknowledgments
References
 
The authors thank Nancy Richardson-Peuteuil for her editorial assistance, and Catherine Lejeune for her helpful comments.


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Material and methods
 Results
 Comment
 Acknowledgments
 References
 

  1. Weissberg D., Refaely Y. Pneumothorax: experience with 1,199 patients. Chest 2000;117:1279-1285.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Miller A.C. Management of spontaneous pneumothorax: back to the future. Eur Respir J 1996;9:1773-1774.[Medline]
  3. Hatz R.A., Kaps M.F., Meimarakis G., Loehe F., Müller C., Fürst H. Long-term results after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for first-time and recurrent spontaneous pneumothorax. Ann Thorac Surg 2000;70:253-257.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Cardillo G., Facciolo F., Giunti R., et al. Videothoracoscopic treatment of primary spontaneous pneumothorax: a 6-year experience. Ann Thorac Surg 2000;69:357-362.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Chan P., Clarke P., Daniel F.J., Knight S.R., Seevanayagam S. Efficacy study of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery pleurodesis for spontaneous pneumothorax. Ann Thorac Surg 2001;71:452-454.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  6. Weinstein M., Fineberg H. Clinical decision analysis. . Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1980.
  7. Naglie G., Krahn M.D., Naimark D., Redelmeier D.A., Detsky A.S. Primer on medical decision analysis: part 3. Estimating probabilities and utilities. Med Decis Making 1997;17:136-141.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Lippert H.L., Lund O., Blegvad S., Larsen H.V. Independent risk factors for cumulative recurrence rate after first spontaneous pneumothorax. Eur Respir J 1991;4:324-331.[Abstract]
  9. Sackett DL, Haynes RB, Guyatt GH, Tugwell P. Clinical epidemiology: a basic science for clinical medicine. 2nd edition. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company, 1991.
  10. Krahn M.D., Naglie G., Naimark D., Redelmeier D.A., Detsky A.S. Primer on medical decision analysis: part 4. Analyzing the model and interpreting the results. Med Decis Making 1997;17:142-151.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Sahn S.A., Heffner J.E. Primary care: spontaneous pneumothorax. N Engl J Med 2000;342:868-874.[Free Full Text]
  12. Inderbitzi R.G.C., Leiser A., Furrer M., Althaus U. Three years' experience in video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) for spontaneous pneumothorax. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1994;107:1410-1415.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Cole F.H., Jr, Cole F.H., Khandekar A., Maxwell J.M., Pate J.W., Walker W.A. Video-assisted thoracic surgery: primary therapy for spontaneous pneumothorax?. Ann Thorac Surg 1995;60:931-935.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Massard G., Thomas P., Wihlm J.M. Minimally invasive management for first and recurrent pneumothorax. Ann Thorac Surg 1998;66:592-599.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Miller K.S., Sahn S.A. Chest tubes: indications, technique, management and complications. Chest 1987;91:258-264.[Free Full Text]
  16. Chan L., Reilly K.M., Henderson C., Kahn F., Salluzzo R.F. Complications rates of tube thoracostomy. Am J Emerg Med 1997;15:368-370.[Medline]
  17. Milikan J.S., Moore E.E., Steiner E., Aragon G.E., VanWay C.W. Complications of tube thoracostomy for acute trauma. Am J Surg 1980;140:738-741.[Medline]
  18. Etoch S.W., Bar-Natan M.F., Marcos F., Miller F.B., Richardson J.D. Tube thoracostomy: factors related to complications. Arch Surg 1995;130:521-526.[Abstract]
  19. Naunheim K.S., Mack M.J., Hazelrigg S.R., et al. Safety and efficacy of video-assisted thoracic surgical techniques for the treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1995;109:1198-1204.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Dumont P., Diemont F., Massard G., Tourmieux B., Wihlm J.M., Morand G. Does a thoracoscopic approach for surgical treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax represent progress?. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1997;11:27-31.[Abstract]
  21. Boutin C., Viallat J.R., Aelony Y. Thoracoscopy in the diagnosis and treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax. In: Boutin C., Viallat J.R., Aelony Y., eds. Practical thoracoscopy, 1st edition Berlin: Springer, 1991:73-80.
  22. Bertrand P.C., Regnard J.F., Spaggiari L., et al. Immediate and long-term results after surgical treatment of primary spontaneous pneumothorax by VATS. Ann Thorac Surg 1996;61:1641-1645.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Casadio C., Rena O., Giobbe R., Rigoni R., Maggi G., Oliaro A. Stappler blebectomy and pleural abrasion by video-assisted thoracoscopy for spontaneous pneumothorax. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 2002;43:259-262.[Medline]
  24. Waller D.A., Forty J., Morritt G.N. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus thoracotomy for spontaneous pneumothorax. Ann Thorac Surg 1994;58:372-377.[Abstract]
  25. Passlick B., Born C., Häussinger K., Thetter O. Efficiency of video-assisted thoracic surgery for primary and secondary spontaneous pneumothorax. Ann Thorac Surg 1998;65:324-327.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Miller A.C., Harvey J.E. Guidelines for the management of spontaneous pneumothorax: standards of care committee, British Thoracic Society. BMJ 1993;307:114-116.
  27. Baumann M.H., Strange C., Heffner J.E., et al. Management of spontaneous pneumothorax: an American College of Chest Physicians Delphi Consensus Statement. Chest 2001;119:590-602.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. Plume S.K. Choices, chances, values. Ann Thorac Surg 1992;53:373.[Medline]
  29. Birkmeyer J.D., Birkmeyer N.J.O. Decision analysis in surgery. Surgery 1996;120:7-15.[Medline]
  30. Schramel F.M.N.H., Sutedja T.G., Braber J.C.E., Van Mourik J.C., Postmus P.E. Cost-effectiveness of video-assisted surgery versus conservative treatment for first time or recurrent spontaneous pneumothorax. Eur Respir J 1996;9:1821-1825.[Abstract]
  31. Crisci R., Coloni G.F. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus thoracotomy for recurrent spontaneous pneumothorax. A comparison of results and costs. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1996;10:556-560.[Abstract]
  32. Hazelrigg S.R., Landreneau R.J., Mack M., et al. Thoracoscopic stapled resection for spontaneous pneumothorax. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1993;105:389-393.[Abstract]
  33. Elixhauser A., Halpern M., Schmier J., Luce B.R. Health care cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis from 1991 to 1996: an update bibliography. Med Care 1998;36(5 Suppl):MS18-147.



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eur Respir JHome page
J-M. Tschopp, R. Rami-Porta, M. Noppen, and P. Astoul
Management of spontaneous pneumothorax: state of the art.
Eur. Respir. J., September 1, 2006; 28(3): 637 - 650.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Author home page(s):
François Clement
Sidney Chocron
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Falcoz, P.-E.
Right arrow Articles by Etievent, J.-P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Falcoz, P.-E.
Right arrow Articles by Etievent, J.-P.
Related Collections
Right arrow Lung - other

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
ANN THORAC SURG ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG
J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG ICVTS ALL CTSNet JOURNALS