Is Surgical Repair With Nerve Allograft More Cost-Effective Than Non-Surgical Management for Persistent Trigeminal Neuropathy? Initial Assessment With Markov Model.
J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2023:S0278-2391(23)00176-3. [PMID:
36893794 DOI:
10.1016/j.joms.2023.02.009]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/15/2022] [Revised: 02/07/2023] [Accepted: 02/12/2023] [Indexed: 03/08/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE
Persistent trigeminal neuropathy (PTN) is associated with high rates of depression, loss of work, and decreased quality of life (QoL). Nerve allograft repair can achieve functional sensory recovery in a predictable manner; however, it bears significant upfront costs. In patients suffering from PTN, is surgical repair with allogeneic nerve graft, when compared to non-surgical therapy, a more cost-effective treatment option?
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A Markov model was constructed with TreeAge Pro Healthcare 2022 (TreeAge Software, Massachusetts) to estimate the direct and indirect costs for PTN. The model ran for 40 years with 1-year-cycles on a 40-year-old model patient with persistent inferior alveolar or lingual nerve injury (S0 to S2+) at 3 months without signs of improvement, and without dysesthesia or neuropathic pain (NPP). The 2 treatment arms were surgery with nerve allograft versus non-surgical management. There were 3 disease states, functional sensory recovery (S3 to S4), hypoesthesia/anesthesia (S0 to S2+), and NPP. Direct surgical costs were calculated using the 2022 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule and verified with standard institutional billing practices. Non-surgical treatment direct costs (follow-up, specialist referral, medications, imaging) and indirect costs (QoL, loss of employment) were determined from historical data and the literature. Direct surgical costs for allograft repair were $13,291. State-specific direct costs for hypoesthesia/anesthesia were $2,127.84 per year, and $3,168.24 for NPP per year. State-specific indirect costs included decreased labor force participation, absenteeism, and decreased QoL.
RESULTS
Surgical treatment with nerve allograft was more effective and had a lower long-term cost. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was -10,751.94, indicating surgical treatment should be utilized based on efficiency and cost. With a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000, the net monetary benefits of surgical treatment are $1,158,339 compared to $830,654 for non-surgical treatment. With a standard threshold incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 50,000, the sensitivity analysis shows that surgical treatment would remain the preferred choice based on efficiency even if surgical costs were doubled.
CONCLUSION
Despite high initial costs of surgical treatment with nerve allograft for PTN, surgical intervention with nerve allograft is a more cost-effective treatment option when compared to non-surgical therapy.
Collapse