Abstract
Vestibular schwannomas (VS) account for approximately 8% of all intracranial neoplasms. Importantly, the cost of the diagnostic workup for VS, including the screening modalities most commonly used, has not been thoroughly investigated. Our aim is to conduct a systematic review of the published literature on costs associated with VS screening. A systematic review of the literature for cost of VS treatment was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The terms “vestibular schwannoma,” “acoustic neuroma,” and “cost” were queried using the PubMed and Embase databases. Studies from all countries were considered. Cost was then corrected for inflation using the US Bureau of Labor Statistics Inflation Calculator, correcting to April 2022. The search resulted in an initial review of 483 articles, of which 12 articles were included in the final analysis. Screening criteria were used for non-neurofibromatosis type I and II patients who complained of asymmetric hearing loss, tinnitus, or vertigo. Patients included in the studies ranged from 72 to 1249. The currency and inflation-adjusted mean cost was $418.40 (range, $21.81 to $487.03, n = 5) for auditory brainstem reflex and $1433.87 (range, $511.64 to $1762.15, n = 3) for non-contrasted computed tomography. A contrasted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan was found to have a median cost of $913.27 (range, $172.25–$2733.99; n = 8) whereas a non-contrasted MRI was found to have a median cost of $478.62 (range, $116.61–$3256.38, n = 4). In terms of cost reporting, of the 12 articles, 1 (8.3%) of them separated out the cost elements, and 10 (83%) of them used local prices, which include institutional costs and/or average costs of multiple institutions. Our findings describe the limited data on published costs for screening and imaging of VS. The paucity of data and significant variability of costs between studies indicates that this endpoint is relatively unexplored, and the cost of screening is poorly understood.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
Available on reasonable request.
References
Carlson ML, Link MJ (2021) Vestibular schwannomas. N Engl J Med 384:1335–1348
Matthies C, Samii M (1997) Management of 1000 vestibular schwannomas (acoustic neuromas): clinical presentation. Neurosurgery 40:1–9 discussion 9-10
Carlson ML, Tveiten ØV, Driscoll CL et al (2014) Long-term dizziness handicap in patients with vestibular schwannoma: a multicenter cross-sectional study. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 151:1028–1037
Sweeney AD, Carlson ML, Shepard NT et al (2018) Congress of Neurological Surgeons systematic review and evidence-based guidelines on otologic and audiologic screening for patients with vestibular schwannomas. Neurosurgery 82:E29–e31
Patel NS, Huang AE, Dowling EM et al (2020) The influence of vestibular schwannoma tumor volume and growth on hearing loss. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 162:530–537
Goldbrunner R, Weller M, Regis J et al (2020) EANO guideline on the diagnosis and treatment of vestibular schwannoma. Neuro-Oncology 22:31–45
Gupta VK, Thakker A, Gupta KK (2020) Vestibular schwannoma: what we know and where we are heading. Head Neck Pathol 14:1058–1066
Pan P, Huang J, Morioka C et al (2016) Cost analysis of vestibular schwannoma screening with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in patients with asymmetrical hearing loss. J Laryngol Otol 130:21–24
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM et al (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Bmj 372:71
Stangerup SE, Caye-Thomasen P (2012) Epidemiology and natural history of vestibular schwannomas. Otolaryngol Clin N Am 45(257-268):vii
Obholzer RJ, Rea PA, Harcourt JP (2004) Magnetic resonance imaging screening for vestibular schwannoma: analysis of published protocols. J Laryngol Otol 118(5):329–332. https://doi.org/10.1258/002221504323086480
Stein SC (2018) Cost-effectiveness research in neurosurgery: we can and we must. Neurosurgery 83:871–878
Rupa V, Job A, George M et al (2003) Cost-effective initial screening for vestibular schwannoma: auditory brainstem response or magnetic resonance imaging? Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 128:823–828
Cheng G, Smith R, Tan AK (2003) Cost comparison of auditory brainstem response versus magnetic resonance imaging screening of acoustic neuroma. J Otolaryngol 32:394–399
Verret DJ, Adelson R, Defatta R (2006) Asymmetric sensorineural hearing loss evaluation with T2 FSE-MRI in a public hospital. Acta Otolaryngol 126(7):705–707
Dang L, Tu NC, Chan EY (2020) Current imaging tools for vestibular schwannoma. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 28:302–307
Rafique I, Wennervaldt K, Melchiors J et al (2016) Auditory brainstem response - a valid and cost-effective screening tool for vestibular schwannoma? Acta Otolaryngol 136:660–662
Kotlarz JP, Eby TL, Borton TE (1992) Analysis of the efficiency of retrocochlear screening. Laryngoscope 102:1108–1112
Robson AK, Leighton SE, Anslow P et al (1993) MRI as a single screening procedure for acoustic neuroma: a cost effective protocol. J R Soc Med 86:455–457
Welling DB, Glasscock IME, Woods CI et al (1990) Acoustic neuroma: a cost-effective approach. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 103(3):364–370
Bhargava EK, Coyle P, Wong B et al (2019) To scan or not to scan-a cross-sectional analysis of the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of audiometric protocols for magnetic resonance imaging screening of vestibular schwannomas. Otol Neurotol 40:S59–s66
Mettias BAD, Lyons M (2019) Magnetic resonance imaging for vestibular schwannoma: cost-effective protocol for referrals. J Laryngol Otol 133:948–952
Crowson MG, Rocke DJ, Hoang JK et al (2017) Cost-effectiveness analysis of a non-contrast screening MRI protocol for vestibular schwannoma in patients with asymmetric sensorineural hearing loss. Neuroradiology 59:727–736
Scholte M, Hentschel MA, Hannink G et al (2019) In search of the most cost-effective monitoring strategy for vestibular schwannoma: a decision analytical modelling study. Clin Otolaryngol 44:525–533
Yang W, Mei X, Li X et al (2020) The prevalence and clinical characteristics of vestibular schwannoma among patients treated as sudden sensorineural hearing loss: a 10-year retrospective study in southern China. Am J Otolaryngol 41:102452
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
SK and RJ were included in the conception and design of the study. SK and AB acquired the data. SK, AB, JR, RD, and CL were involved in the analysis and interpretation of the data. SK, AB, and JR drafted the article and all authors critically revised the article. LC was involved in administrative support.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
Not required.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Koester, S.W., Bishay, A.E., Rogers, J.L. et al. Cost considerations for vestibular schwannoma screening and imaging: a systematic review. Neurosurg Rev 47, 59 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-024-02305-3
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-024-02305-3