Purpose: To determine the cost-effectiveness of intracameral moxifloxacin compared with traditional antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing endophthalmitis after cataract surgery. Setting: Theoretical surgical center in the United States. Design: Evaluation of technology. Methods: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) and incremental cost-utility ratios (ICUR) were calculated for patients having cataract surgery with traditional antibiotic prophylaxis (perioperative topical antibiotics) compared with perioperative topical antibiotics with intracameral moxifloxacin. The base case was a healthy binocular 73-year-old man having first-eye cataract surgery. The incidences and costs were derived from PubMed English literature searches, Medicare reimbursement rates, and average wholesale prices. All costs and benefits were adjusted 3% per annum and for inflation to 2017 United States dollars. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess uncertainty. Results: Compared with traditional prophylaxis, an adjuvant 500 μg intracameral moxifloxacin (for $20) was cost-saving from a societal perspective in the base case; in probabilistic sensitivity analyses, all the values were within the societal willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000/quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs), and 6142 (61%) of 10 000 iterations were cost-saving. From a healthcare sector perspective, intracameral moxifloxacin was cost-effective, with an ICUR of $8275/QALY. In cases with posterior capsule tears, a $20 intracameral moxifloxacin was cost-saving. Conclusions: From a societal perspective in the U.S., a topical perioperative antibiotic with a 500 μg intracameral moxifloxacin costing $22 dollars or less was cost-effective and cost-saving. From a healthcare sector perspective, a $20 intracameral moxifloxacin was cost-effective but not cost-saving. Adjuvant intracameral moxifloxacin had greater effectiveness in improving QALYs than topical antibiotics.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Sensory Systems