IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0100563.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Cost-Minimization Analysis of Tissue-Engineered Constructs for Corneal Endothelial Transplantation

Author

Listed:
  • Tien-En Tan
  • Gary S L Peh
  • Benjamin L George
  • Howard Y Cajucom-Uy
  • Di Dong
  • Eric A Finkelstein
  • Jodhbir S Mehta

Abstract

Corneal endothelial transplantation or endothelial keratoplasty has become the preferred choice of transplantation for patients with corneal blindness due to endothelial dysfunction. Currently, there is a worldwide shortage of transplantable tissue, and demand is expected to increase further with aging populations. Tissue-engineered alternatives are being developed, and are likely to be available soon. However, the cost of these constructs may impair their widespread use. A cost-minimization analysis comparing tissue-engineered constructs to donor tissue procured from eye banks for endothelial keratoplasty was performed. Both initial investment costs and recurring costs were considered in the analysis to arrive at a final tissue cost per transplant. The clinical outcomes of endothelial keratoplasty with tissue-engineered constructs and with donor tissue procured from eye banks were assumed to be equivalent. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to simulate various possible scenarios, and to determine the robustness of the results. A tissue engineering strategy was cheaper in both investment cost and recurring cost. Tissue-engineered constructs for endothelial keratoplasty could be produced at a cost of US$880 per transplant. In contrast, utilizing donor tissue procured from eye banks for endothelial keratoplasty required US$3,710 per transplant. Sensitivity analyses performed further support the results of this cost-minimization analysis across a wide range of possible scenarios. The use of tissue-engineered constructs for endothelial keratoplasty could potentially increase the supply of transplantable tissue and bring the costs of corneal endothelial transplantation down, making this intervention accessible to a larger group of patients. Tissue-engineering strategies for corneal epithelial constructs or other tissue types, such as pancreatic islet cells, should also be subject to similar pharmacoeconomic analyses.

Suggested Citation

  • Tien-En Tan & Gary S L Peh & Benjamin L George & Howard Y Cajucom-Uy & Di Dong & Eric A Finkelstein & Jodhbir S Mehta, 2014. "A Cost-Minimization Analysis of Tissue-Engineered Constructs for Corneal Endothelial Transplantation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-9, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0100563
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0100563
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0100563
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0100563&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0100563?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elena Ezhkova & Elaine Fuchs, 2010. "An eye to treating blindness," Nature, Nature, vol. 466(7306), pages 567-568, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Simone A. Huygens & Isaac Corro Ramos & Carlijn V. C. Bouten & Jolanda Kluin & Shih Ting Chiu & Gary L. Grunkemeier & Johanna J. M. Takkenberg & Maureen P. M. H. Rutten-van Mölken, 2020. "Early cost-utility analysis of tissue-engineered heart valves compared to bioprostheses in the aortic position in elderly patients," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(4), pages 557-572, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0100563. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.