The economic impact of closed-incision negative-pressure therapy in high-risk abdominal incisions: A cost-utility analysis

Karan Chopra, Arvind U. Gowda, Chris Morrow, Luther Holton, Devinder P. Singh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

33 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Complex abdominal wall reconstruction is beset by postoperative complications. A recent meta-analysis comparing the use of closed-incision negative-pressure therapy to standard dressings found a statistically significant reduction in surgical-site infection. The use of closed-incision negative-pressure therapy is gaining acceptance in this population; however, the economic impact of this innovative dressing remains unknown. In this study, a cost-utility analysis was performed assessing closed-incision negative-pressure therapy and standard dressings following closure of abdominal incisions in high-risk patients. Methods: Cost-utility methodology involved reviewing literature related to closed-incision negative-pressure therapy in abdominal wall surgery, obtaining utility estimates to calculate quality-adjusted life-year scores for successful surgery and surgery complicated by surgical-site infection, summing costs using Medicare Current Procedural Terminology codes, and creating a decision tree illuminating the most cost-effective dressing strategy. One-way sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the robustness of the results. Results: The aforementioned meta-analysis comparing closed-incision negative-pressure therapy to standard dressings included a subset of five studies assessing abdominal wall surgery in 829 patients (260 closed-incision negativepressure therapy and 569 standard dressings). Decision tree analysis revealed an estimated savings of $1546.52 and a gain of 0.0024 quality-adjusted lifeyear with closed-incision negative-pressure therapy compared with standard dressings; therefore, closed-incision negative-pressure therapy is a dominant treatment strategy. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that closed-incision negative-pressure therapy is a cost-effective option when the surgical-site infection rate is greater than 16.39 percent. Conclusion: The use of closed-incision negative-pressure therapy is cost-saving following closure of abdominal incisions in high-risk patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1284-1289
Number of pages6
JournalPlastic and reconstructive surgery
Volume137
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2016
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The economic impact of closed-incision negative-pressure therapy in high-risk abdominal incisions: A cost-utility analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this