• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

PET-CT is Cost-Effective for N2 Disease After Chemoradiotherapy

by Sue Pondrom • September 17, 2014

  • Tweet
  • Email
Print-Friendly Version

Clinical Question: Is positron emission tomography-computerized tomography (PET-CT) scanning cost-effective for the management of the neck after chemoradiotherapy (CRT)?

Background: About 70 percent of neck dissection specimens have no pathologic disease. While PET imaging is highly expensive, it is used extensively for post-treatment surveillance, even though the utility of this usage has not been well studied. Additionally, insurance providers are reluctant to reimburse protocols that require serial PET-CT imaging in today’s current healthcare climate.

You Might Also Like

  • HN Cancer Patients with Negative Imaging History Derive Limited Benefit from Subsequent PET-CT
  • PET-Directed Management of Node-Positive Head and Neck Cancers
  • PET/CT Useful for Head and Neck Cancers, with Limitations
  • PET-CT Adds to Management of Salivary Gland Malignancies
Explore This Issue
February 2012

Study design: Hypothetical patient case study and literature review.

Setting: Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans; and Department of Otolaryngology and Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Penn.

Synopsis: The authors conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing up-front neck dissection to serial PET-CT in a hypothetical clinical scenario involving a patient with oropharyngeal cancer with pre-treatment N2 disease and having a complete response. Additionally, a literature review was performed to obtain information on incidence, probabilities and range for various clinical events in the algorithm. The team found that the PET-CT strategy would cost an average of $14,492 per patient, while neck dissection had a 0.6% percent greater efficacy in controlling neck disease, with a $22,433 incremental cost. One limitation to the study was the narrow applicability to those patients with characteristics similar to the hypothetical clinical scenario, which includes a limited follow-up period of one year.

Bottom line: The use of PET-CT imaging is the more cost-effective strategy, compared with up-front neck dissection, for surveillance of the patient with pre-treatment N2 disease, a controlled primary tumor and a clinically negative neck after completion of definitive CRT.

Reference: Rabalais A, Walvekar RR, Johnson JT, et al. A cost-effectiveness analysis of positron emission tomography-computed tomography surveillance versus up-front neck dissection for management of the neck for N2 disease after chemoradiotherapy. Laryngoscope. 2012;122(2):311-314.

Filed Under: Head and Neck, Head and Neck, Literature Reviews, Practice Focus Issue: February 2012

You Might Also Like:

  • HN Cancer Patients with Negative Imaging History Derive Limited Benefit from Subsequent PET-CT
  • PET-Directed Management of Node-Positive Head and Neck Cancers
  • PET/CT Useful for Head and Neck Cancers, with Limitations
  • PET-CT Adds to Management of Salivary Gland Malignancies

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Have you invented or patented something that betters the field of otolaryngology?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • The Best Site for Pediatric TT Placement: OR or Office?

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Keeping Watch for Skin Cancers on the Head and Neck

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • Leaky Pipes—Time to Focus on Our Foundations
    • You Are Among Friends: The Value Of Being In A Group
    • How To: Full Endoscopic Procedures of Total Parotidectomy
    • How To: Does Intralesional Steroid Injection Effectively Mitigate Vocal Fold Scarring in a Rabbit Model?
    • What Is the Optimal Anticoagulation in HGNS Surgery in Patients with High-Risk Cardiac Comorbidities?

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939