DSAEK more cost-effective than PK

Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty was found to be better than penetrating keratoplasty in terms of cost-effectiveness and utility benefits in treating corneal endothelial disease, according to a study.

The retrospective study analyzed the cost-effectiveness of each technique through calculations of probable outcomes and complications based on published peer-reviewed literature. The analysis was administered from a third-party payer perspective over a 5-year time frame, the study authors said.

A model was designed to acquire and compare the quality-adjusted life years and costs of DSAEK and PK through obtaining the probabilities, utilities and expenses of both techniques.

The study found that DSAEK had greater utility in terms of quality-adjusted life years compared with PK (3.15 vs. 2.47). DSAEK had a lower cost at $9,362 compared with PK at $10,239.

According to the model, even if dislocation rates for DSAEK were near 50%, DSAEK would cost less than PK, and if rejection rates for DSAEK were as high as 28%, DSAEK would be the “dominant” procedure over PK.

Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty was found to be better than penetrating keratoplasty in terms of cost-effectiveness and utility benefits in treating corneal endothelial disease, according to a study.

The retrospective study analyzed the cost-effectiveness of each technique through calculations of probable outcomes and complications based on published peer-reviewed literature. The analysis was administered from a third-party payer perspective over a 5-year time frame, the study authors said.

A model was designed to acquire and compare the quality-adjusted life years and costs of DSAEK and PK through obtaining the probabilities, utilities and expenses of both techniques.

The study found that DSAEK had greater utility in terms of quality-adjusted life years compared with PK (3.15 vs. 2.47). DSAEK had a lower cost at $9,362 compared with PK at $10,239.

According to the model, even if dislocation rates for DSAEK were near 50%, DSAEK would cost less than PK, and if rejection rates for DSAEK were as high as 28%, DSAEK would be the “dominant” procedure over PK.