Economic evaluation of XXXX versus @entity2982 in The Netherlands.

@entity1 @entity9762 @entity2982
PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost effectiveness of @entity9762 ( @entity9762 ) versus @entity2982 ( @entity2982 ) in The Netherlands. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomized, multicenter clinical trial. METHODS: Fifty-three @entity1 with corneal stromal pathologic features not affecting the endothelium were included with 28 @entity1 in the @entity9762 group and 25 in the @entity2982 group. Quality of life was measured before surgery and 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. The main outcome measures were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per clinically improved @entity1 on the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire and per @entity1 with endothelial cell loss of maximally 20% within the first year. RESULTS: Mean total bootstrapped costs per @entity1 were    7607 (US 10,498) in the @entity9762 group and    6552 (US 9042) in the @entity2982 group. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were    9977 (US 13,768) per clinically improved @entity1 on the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire and    6900 (US 9522) per @entity1 with cell loss of maximally 20%. In @entity1 without perforation of the Descemet membrane, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was    5250 (US 7245) per @entity1 . CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that @entity9762 is more costly and more effective as compared with @entity2982 . Results on the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire were in favor of @entity9762 , and endothelial cell loss in @entity9762 @entity1 remained stable after 6 months, whereas cell loss in @entity2982 @entity1 continued. Furthermore, @entity9762 procedures performed without perforation of the Descemet membrane were more effective. However, because it is unknown what society is willing to pay for an additional improved @entity1 , cost effectiveness of @entity9762 within a limited follow-up period of 12 months is unclear. Cost effectiveness of @entity9762 may improve over time because of lower graft failure.
