Trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis of ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) versus DSAEK

被引:5
|
作者
Simons, Rob W. P. [1 ]
Dickman, Mor M. [1 ]
van den Biggelaar, Frank J. H. M. [1 ]
Dirksen, Carmen D. [2 ]
Van Rooij, Jeroen [3 ]
Remeijer, Lies [3 ]
Van der Lelij, Allegonda [4 ,5 ]
Wijdh, Robert H. J. [6 ]
Kruit, Pieter J. [7 ]
Nuijts, Rudy M. M. A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Maastricht Univ, Med Ctr, Univ Eye Clin Maastricht, POB 5800, NL-6202 AZ Maastricht, Netherlands
[2] Maastricht Univ, Med Ctr, CAPHRI Sch Publ Hlth & Primary Care, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Med Technol Assessment, Maastricht, Netherlands
[3] Rotterdam Eye Hosp, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[4] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Dept Ophthalmol, Utrecht, Netherlands
[5] Cent Mil Hosp, Dept Ophthalmol, Utrecht, Netherlands
[6] Univ Med Ctr Groningen, Dept Ophthalmol, Groningen, Netherlands
[7] Euro Tissue Bank, Beverwijk, Netherlands
关键词
corneal transplantation; cost-effectiveness; costs; Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty; Fuchs' endothelial dystrophy; quality-adjusted life years; ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty; POSTERIOR LAMELLAR KERATOPLASTY; PENETRATING KERATOPLASTY; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.1111/aos.14126
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Purpose To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) versus standard DSAEK. Methods A cost-effectiveness analysis using data from a multicentre randomized clinical trial was performed. The time horizon was 12 months postoperatively. Sixty-four eyes of 64 patients with Fuchs' endothelial dystrophy were included and randomized to UT-DSAEK (n = 33) or DSAEK (n = 31). Relevant resources from healthcare and societal perspectives were included in the cost analysis. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were determined using the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 questionnaire. The main outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER; incremental societal costs per QALY). Results Societal costs were euro9431 (US$11 586) for UT-DSAEK and euro9110 (US$11 192) for DSAEK. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were 0.74 in both groups. The ICER indicated inferiority of UT-DSAEK. The cost-effectiveness probability ranged from 37% to 42%, assuming the maximum acceptable ICER ranged from euro2500-euro80 000 (US$3071-US$98 280) per QALY. Additional analyses were performed omitting one UT-DSAEK patient who required a regraft [ICER euro9057 (US$11 127) per QALY, cost-effectiveness probability: 44-62%] and correcting QALYs for an imbalance in baseline utilities [ICER euro23 827 (US$29 271) per QALY, cost-effectiveness probability: 36-59%]. Furthermore, the ICER was euro2101 (US$2581) per patient with clinical improvement in best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (>= 0.2 logMAR) and euro3274 (US$4022) per patient with clinical improvement in National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire-25 composite score (>= 10 points). Conclusion The base case analysis favoured DSAEK, since costs of UT-DSAEK were higher while QALYs were comparable. However, additional analyses revealed no preference for UT-DSAEK or DSAEK. Further cost-effectiveness studies are required to reduce uncertainty.
引用
收藏
页码:756 / 763
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Hemi-Ultrathin Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty (Hemi-UT-DSAEK) Using Pediatric Donor Corneas: A Case Series
    Leon, Pia
    Francescutti, Lorena
    Gentile, Pietro
    Birattari, Federica
    Ponzin, Diego
    Camposampiero, Davide
    Franch, Antonella
    Parekh, Mohit
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2023, 12 (17)
  • [32] Descemet stripping and automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) versus non-Descemet stripping and automated endothelial keratoplasty (nDSAEK) for bullous keratopathy:a 10 year follow-up
    Hokama, Lisa
    Tajima, Kotomi
    Hirayama, Masatoshi
    Shimmura, Shigeto
    Negishi, Kazuno
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2024, 65 (07)
  • [33] Comparative Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty Versus Penetrating Keratoplasty in the United States
    Prabhu, Shreya S.
    Kaakeh, Rola
    Sugar, Alan
    Smith, Dean G.
    Shtein, Roni M.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2013, 155 (01) : 45 - 53
  • [34] Change in Central and Peripheral Corneal Thickness in UT-DSAEK and DMEK in the Descemet Endothelial Thickness Comparison Trial
    Gutowski, Michal
    Rose-Nussbaumer, Jennifer
    Lin, Charles
    Austin, Ariana
    Labadzinzki, Paula
    Clover, Jameson
    Chamberlain, Winston
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2020, 61 (07)
  • [35] Cost-effectiveness of Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus penetrating keratoplasty in patients with endothelial dysfunction in India
    Shah, Pooja
    Mukhija, Ritika
    Gupta, Noopur
    Vanathi, M.
    Tandon, Radhika
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2021, 69 (09) : 2447 - 2451
  • [36] Effect of donor graft characteristics on clinical outcomes in Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK)
    Yin, G. Ho Wang
    Sampo, M.
    Soare, S.
    Hoffart, L.
    JOURNAL FRANCAIS D OPHTALMOLOGIE, 2017, 40 (01): : 36 - 43
  • [37] Descemet's Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty (DSAEK) and Glaucoma: A Retrospective Review of Treatment Outcomes
    Floyd, M. S.
    Sutphin, J. E., Jr.
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2010, 51 (13)
  • [38] Cost-Effectiveness of Descemet's Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty versus Penetrating Keratoplasty
    Bose, Saideep
    Ang, Marcus
    Mehta, Jodhbir S.
    Tan, Donald T.
    Finkelstein, Eric
    OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2013, 120 (03) : 464 - 470
  • [39] Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) versus repeat penetrating keratoplasty (PKP) to manage eyes with failed corneal graft
    Khairallah, Abdulrahman
    ANNALS OF SAUDI MEDICINE, 2018, 38 (01) : 516 - 521
  • [40] Impairment of Visual Acuity Due to Permanent Descemet Folds Following Descemet Stripping and Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty (DSAEK)
    Mueller, C.
    Sekundo, W.
    Schulze, A.
    Hoffmann, E. M.
    Pfeiffer, N.
    Vetter, J.
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2010, 51 (13)