Search

Background: Deep learning (DL) is a new technology that can assist prenatal ultrasound (US) in the detection of congenital heart disease (CHD) at the prenatal stage. Hence, an economic-epidemiologic evaluation (aka Cost-Utility Analysis) is required to assist policymakers in deciding whether to adopt the new technology. Methods: The incremental cost-utility ratios (CUR), of adding DL assisted ultrasound (DL-US) to the current provision of US plus pulse oximetry (POX), was calculated by building a spreadsheet model that integrated demographic, economic epidemiological, health service utilization, screening performance, survival and lifetime quality of life data based on the standard formula: CUR = Increase in Intervention Costs - Decrease in Treatment costs Averted QALY losses of adding DL to US & POX US screening data were based on real-world operational routine reports (as opposed to research studies). The DL screening cost of 145 USD was based on Israeli US costs plus 20.54 USD for reading and recording screens. Results: The addition of DL assisted US, which is associated with increased sensitivity (95% vs 58.1%), resulted in far fewer undiagnosed infants (16 vs 102 [or 2.9% vs 15.4%] of the 560 and 659 births, respectively). Adoption of DL-US will add 1,204 QALYs. with increased screening costs 22.5 million USD largely offset by decreased treatment costs (20.4 million USD). Therefore, the new DL-US technology is considered "very cost-effective", costing only 1,720 USD per QALY. For most performance combinations (sensitivity > 80%, specificity > 90%), the adoption of DL-US is either cost effective or very cost effective. For specificities greater than 98% (with sensitivities above 94%), DL-US (& POX) is said to "dominate" US (& POX) by providing more QALYs at a lower cost. Conclusion: Our exploratory CUA calculations indicate the feasibility of DL-US as being at least cost-effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Scarce data exist about screening, diagnosis and prognosis of non-primary Cytomegalovirus (CMV) during pregnancy. We aimed to examine antenatal diagnosis of maternal non-primary CMV infection and to identify risk factors for congenial CMV disease.Methods: Retrospective cohort of 107 neonates with congenital symptomatic CMV infection, following either primary (n = 95) or non-primary (n = 12) maternal CMV infection. We compared the groups for the manifestations and severity of congenial CMV disease, as well as for possible factors associated with the risk of developing CMV related infant morbidity.Results: Disease severity is not similar in affected newborns, with a higher incidence of abnormal brain sonographic findings, following primary versus non-primary maternal CMV infection (76.8% vs. 8.3%, p < .001). Symptomatic congenital CMV disease following a non-primary infection is more frequent if gestational hypertensive disorders and/or gestational diabetes mellitus have ensued during pregnancy (33.3% vs. 9.9%, p <0.038), as well as if any medications were taken throughout gestation (50% vs. 16.8%, p <0.016). CMV-IgM demonstrates a low detection rate for non-primary maternal infection during pregnancy compared to primary infection (25% vs. 75.8%, p = 0.0008).Conclusion: Non-primary maternal CMV infection has an impact on the neonate. Although not readily diagnosed during pregnancy, knowledge of risk factors may aid in raising clinical suspicion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]