{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.031685678073510776, 'fraction_numerical': 0.028517110266159697, 'mean_word_length': 4.805147058823529, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Cost Comparison of Carotid Endarterectomy versus Carotid Stenting in Japan].

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has been covered by the health insurance system in Japan since 2008. There have been few studies concerning medical costs and charges for patients who received CEA or CAS in Japan. The aim of this study was to elucidate the difference in the costs between the patients who received CEA and those who received CAS in Japan. Between 2010 and 2011, 19 patients who received CEA and 20 patients who received CAS were retrospectively reviewed. Age, sex, symptomatic/asymptomatic, emergent/scheduled, length of stay, outcome, cost for the procedure (professional fee), supply for the operation, the total medical service fee, and copayment of the patients was compared between the two treatment groups. No significant difference was detected between the two groups except for the supply of the operation and the total medical service fee (CEA:mean 1,565,580 yen vs CAS 2,758,360 yen, p=0.0001). On the other hand, no significant difference was obtained in the copayment of the patients (CEA 71,895 yen, CAS 72,458 yen). Even when limited to the scheduled cases, similar results were obtained. There is a monthly copayment limit in the health insurance system in Japan, which results in a reasonable charge for patients who received CAS, despite the fact that the rest of the fee including high costs for the supplies was paid by the company and the nation. To reduce the medical costs, Japanese have to be aware of the high costs in CAS, most of which is due to the supplies.