TY - JOUR
T1 - Immediate Reconstruction of Oncologic Spinal Wounds Is Cost-Effective Compared with Conventional Primary Wound Closure
AU - Mericli, Alexander F.
AU - Rhines, Laurence
AU - Bird, Justin
AU - Liu, Jun
AU - Selber, Jesse C.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.
PY - 2019/11/1
Y1 - 2019/11/1
N2 - Background: Several studies have demonstrated a reduced wound complication rate when immediate soft-tissue reconstruction is performed after complex spine instrumentations in high-risk patients; however, the cost-effectiveness of this technique is not known. The authors hypothesized that immediate soft-tissue reconstruction of oncologic spine wounds would be a cost-effective strategy compared with the standard of care (i.e., oncologic spine surgery with conventional primary wound closure). Methods: The authors used a decision tree model to evaluate the cost-utility, from the perspective of a hospital/insurer, of immediate reconstruction relative to the standard of care after oncologic spine surgery. A systematic review of the literature on oncologic spine surgery and immediate and delayed spinal wound reconstruction was performed to estimate health state probabilities. Overall expected cost and quality-adjusted life-years were assessed using a Monte Carlo simulation and sensitivity analyses. Results: Immediate soft-tissue reconstruction after oncologic spine surgery had an expected cost of $81,458.90 and an expected average of 24.19 quality-adjusted life-years, whereas primary wound closure (no reconstruction) had an expected cost of $83,434.34 and an expected average of 24.17 quality-adjusted life-years, making immediate reconstruction the dominant, most cost-effective strategy. Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis demonstrated that immediate reconstruction was the preferred and most cost-effective option in the majority of simulations. Even when the willingness-to-pay threshold varied from $0 to $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, immediate reconstruction remained the dominant strategy across all iterations. Conclusion: This cost-utility analysis suggests that immediate soft-tissue reconstruction after oncologic spine surgery is more cost-effective than primary closure alone.
AB - Background: Several studies have demonstrated a reduced wound complication rate when immediate soft-tissue reconstruction is performed after complex spine instrumentations in high-risk patients; however, the cost-effectiveness of this technique is not known. The authors hypothesized that immediate soft-tissue reconstruction of oncologic spine wounds would be a cost-effective strategy compared with the standard of care (i.e., oncologic spine surgery with conventional primary wound closure). Methods: The authors used a decision tree model to evaluate the cost-utility, from the perspective of a hospital/insurer, of immediate reconstruction relative to the standard of care after oncologic spine surgery. A systematic review of the literature on oncologic spine surgery and immediate and delayed spinal wound reconstruction was performed to estimate health state probabilities. Overall expected cost and quality-adjusted life-years were assessed using a Monte Carlo simulation and sensitivity analyses. Results: Immediate soft-tissue reconstruction after oncologic spine surgery had an expected cost of $81,458.90 and an expected average of 24.19 quality-adjusted life-years, whereas primary wound closure (no reconstruction) had an expected cost of $83,434.34 and an expected average of 24.17 quality-adjusted life-years, making immediate reconstruction the dominant, most cost-effective strategy. Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis demonstrated that immediate reconstruction was the preferred and most cost-effective option in the majority of simulations. Even when the willingness-to-pay threshold varied from $0 to $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, immediate reconstruction remained the dominant strategy across all iterations. Conclusion: This cost-utility analysis suggests that immediate soft-tissue reconstruction after oncologic spine surgery is more cost-effective than primary closure alone.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074552238&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85074552238&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/PRS.0000000000006170
DO - 10.1097/PRS.0000000000006170
M3 - Article
C2 - 31441805
AN - SCOPUS:85074552238
SN - 0032-1052
VL - 144
SP - 1182
EP - 1195
JO - Plastic and reconstructive surgery
JF - Plastic and reconstructive surgery
IS - 5
ER -