Cost-Effectiveness of Descemet's Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty versus Penetrating Keratoplasty

被引:33
|
作者
Bose, Saideep [1 ]
Ang, Marcus [2 ,3 ]
Mehta, Jodhbir S. [2 ,3 ,4 ,5 ]
Tan, Donald T. [2 ]
Finkelstein, Eric [1 ]
机构
[1] Duke NUS Grad Med Sch, Singapore 169857, Singapore
[2] Singapore Natl Eye Ctr, Singapore, Singapore
[3] Singapore Eye Res Inst, Singapore, Singapore
[4] Natl Univ Hlth Syst, Dept Ophthalmol, Singapore, Singapore
[5] Duke NUS Grad Med Sch, Dept Clin Sci, Singapore, Singapore
关键词
QUALITY-OF-LIFE; VISUAL-ACUITY; CORNEAL TRANSPLANTATION; LAMELLAR KERATOPLASTY; KERATOCONUS; UTILITY; EYES;
D O I
10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.08.024
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Purpose: Selective endothelial transplantation in the form of Descemet's stripping endothelial keratoplasty (DSEK) is rapidly replacing traditional full-thickness penetrating keratoplasty (PK) for endothelial disease. An incremental cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to determine whether the benefits of DSEK are worth the additional costs. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Participants: Patients at the Singapore National Eye Center, a tertiary eye center in Singapore, with Fuchs' dystrophy or bullous keratopathy who underwent either PK or DSEK. Intervention: Patients underwent either PK (n = 171) or DSEK (n = 93) from January 2001 through December 2007. Data were collected from inpatient and outpatient notes corresponding to the time immediately before the procedure to up to 3 years after. Main Outcome Measures: Improvements in best spectacle-corrected visual acuity were used to calculate the increase in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) 3 years after the procedure. This was combined with hospital charges (a proxy for costs) to determine incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) comparing PK with no intervention and DSEK with PK. Results: Three-year charges for DSEK and PK were $7476 and $7236, respectively. The regression-adjusted improvement in visual acuity for PK relative to no intervention was -0.613 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) units (P<0.001), and for DSEK relative to PK, it was -0.199 logMAR units (P = 0.045). The regression-adjusted marginal gain in utility for PK relative to no intervention was 0.128 QALYs (P<0.001) and for DSEK relative to PK was 0.046 QALYs (P = 0.031). This resulted in ICERs of $56 409 per QALY for PK relative to no intervention and $5209 per QALY for the more expensive DSEK relative to PK. Conclusions: If the goal is to maximize societal health gains given fixed resources, DSEK should be the preferred strategy. For a fixed budget, it is possible to achieve greater QALY gains by providing DSEK to as many patients as possible (and nothing to others), rather than providing PK. Financial Disclosure(s): The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article. Ophthalmology 2013;120:464-470 (C) 2013 by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.
引用
收藏
页码:464 / 470
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Visual Outcomes of Ultrathin-Descemet Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty versus Descemet Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty
    Droutsas, Konstantinos
    Petrelli, Myrsini
    Miltsakakis, Dimitrios
    Andreanos, Konstantinos
    Karagianni, Anastasia
    Lazaridis, Apostolos
    Koutsandrea, Chrysanthi
    Kymionis, George
    JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2018, 2018
  • [22] Trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis of Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty (DMEK) versus Ultrathin Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK)
    Simons, R. W. P.
    Dunker, S. L.
    Dickman, M. M.
    van den Biggelaar, F. J. H. M.
    Dirksen, C. D.
    Nuijts, R. M. M. A.
    ACTA OPHTHALMOLOGICA, 2020, 98 : 7 - 8
  • [23] Trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) versus ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK)
    Simons, Rob W. P.
    Dunker, Suryan L.
    Dickman, Mor M.
    Nuijts, Rudy M. M. A.
    van den Biggelaar, Frank J. H. M.
    Dirksen, Carmen D.
    ACTA OPHTHALMOLOGICA, 2023, 101 (03) : 319 - 329
  • [24] Descemet's stripping endothelial keratoplasty
    Price, Marianne O.
    Price, Francis W.
    CURRENT OPINION IN OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2007, 18 (04) : 290 - 294
  • [25] Outcomes of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty, Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty from a single centre study
    S. Heinzelmann
    D. Böhringer
    P. Eberwein
    T. Reinhard
    P. Maier
    Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 2016, 254 : 515 - 522
  • [26] Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty for Repeated Penetrating Keratoplasty Graft Failure
    Hwang, Gyu Deok
    Yun, Hye Yeon
    Ha, Min Ji
    Whang, Woong Joo
    Chang, Dong Jin
    Hwang, Ho Sik
    Na, Kyung Sun
    JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN OPHTHALMOLOGICAL SOCIETY, 2021, 62 (03): : 394 - 399
  • [27] Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty in a child after failed penetrating keratoplasty
    Kymionis, George D.
    Kankariya, Vardhaman P.
    Diakonis, Vasilios F.
    Karavitaki, Alexandra E.
    Siganos, Charalampos S.
    Pallikaris, Ioannis G.
    JOURNAL OF AAPOS, 2012, 16 (01): : 95 - 96
  • [28] Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty in Failed Penetrating Keratoplasty Patients REPLY
    Terry, Mark A.
    Straiko, Michael D.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2011, 152 (02) : 324 - 325
  • [29] Comparison of the Visual Outcomes of Descemet's Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty (DSAEK) and Penetrating Keratoplasty
    Chikama, T. -I.
    Sato, Y.
    Morita, Y.
    Yanai, R.
    Yamada, N.
    Morishige, N.
    Nishida, T.
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2010, 51 (13)
  • [30] Comparison of intraocular pressure post penetrating keratoplasty vs Descemet's stripping endothelial keratoplasty
    Sharma, Rahul A.
    Bursztyn, Lulu L. C. D.
    Golesic, Elizabeth
    Mather, Rookaya
    Tingey, David P.
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY-JOURNAL CANADIEN D OPHTALMOLOGIE, 2016, 51 (01): : 19 - 24