Cost-effectiveness of Finger Replantation Compared With Revision Amputation.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Traumatic digit amputation is the most common type of amputation injury, but the cost-effectiveness of its treatments is unknown.

Objective

To assess the cost-effectiveness of finger replantation compared with revision amputation.

Design, setting, and participants

This economic evaluation was conducted using data from the Finger Replantation and Amputation Challenges in Assessing Impairment, Satisfaction, and Effectiveness (FRANCHISE), a retrospective, multicenter cohort study at 19 centers in the United States and Asia that enrolled participants from August 1, 2016, to April 12, 2018. Model variables were based on the FRANCHISE database, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and published literature. A total of 257 participants with unilateral traumatic finger amputations treated with revision amputation or replantation distal to the metacarpophalangeal joint and at least 1 year of follow-up after treatment were included in the analysis.

Exposures

Revision amputation or replantation of traumatic finger amputations.

Main outcomes and measures

Main outcome measures were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), total costs (in US dollars), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). A willingness-to-pay threshold of $100?000 per QALY was used to assess cost-effectiveness.

Results

Of the 257 study participants (mean [SD] age, 46.7 [15.9] years; 221 [86.0%] male), 178 underwent finger replantation and 79 underwent revision amputation. In a base case of a 46.7-year-old patient, replantation was associated with QALY gains of 0.30 (95% credible interval [CrI], -0.72 to 1.38) for single-finger (not thumb), 0.39 (95% CrI, -1.00 to 1.90) for thumb, 1.69 (95% CrI, -0.13 to 3.76) for multifinger excluding thumb, and 1.27 (95% CrI, -2.21 to 5.04) for multifinger including thumb injury patterns. Corresponding ICERs for replantation compared with revision amputation were $99?157 per QALY for single-finger (not thumb), $66?278 per QALY for thumb, $18?388 per QALY for multifinger excluding thumb, and $21?528 per QALY for multifinger including thumb injury patterns. Sensitivity analysis revealed that age at time of injury, life expectancy, postinjury utility, wages, and time off work for recovery had the strongest associations with cost-effectiveness. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed the following chances of replantation being cost-effective: 47% in single-finger (not thumb), 52% in thumb, 78% in multifinger excluding thumb, and 64% in multifinger including thumb injury patterns.

Conclusions and relevance

With proper patient selection, replantation of all finger amputation patterns, whether single-finger or multifinger injuries, may be cost-effective compared with revision amputation. Multifinger replantations had a higher probability of being cost-effective than single-finger replantations. Cost-effectiveness may depend on injury pattern and patient factors and thus appears to be important for consideration when patients and surgeons are deciding whether to replant or amputate.

SUBMITTER: Yoon AP 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6902751 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature