Cost-Effectiveness of Vioptix versus Clinical Examination for Flap Monitoring of Autologous Free Tissue Breast Reconstruction.

Abstract

Vioptix is a near-infrared spectroscopy tissue oximetry technology that allows for noninvasive monitoring of flap perfusion. Despite the reported benefits of Vioptix, the cost-effectiveness of this flap monitoring technology has not been compared to clinical examination alone. A cost-effectiveness model, from the patient perspective, was constructed with two treatment arms: clinical examination versus clinical examination combined with Vioptix for flap monitoring after autologous, free flap breast reconstruction. Costs, utilities, and other model inputs were identified from the literature. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Gamma distributions were created for cost variables, and beta distributions were created for probability variables. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio under $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) was considered cost-effective. All analyses were performed using TreeAge Pro (Williamstown, Mass.). Mean cost of autologous free tissue transfer breast reconstruction with clinical examination-based flap monitoring was found to be $37,561 with an effectiveness of 0.79, whereas the mean cost of clinical examination with Vioptix for flap monitoring was $39,361 with effectiveness of 0.82. This yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $60,507 for clinical examination combined with Vioptix for flap monitoring. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that clinical examination with Vioptix became cost-effective when the cost of Vioptix was less than $1487. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis found that clinical examination was cost-effective in 86.5 percent of cases. Although clinical examination combined with Vioptix is minimally more effective for flap monitoring after autologous, free flap breast reconstruction, clinical examination alone is the more cost-effective flap monitoring option.