Cargando…

SLAP Repair Versus Biceps Tenodesis in Patients Younger Than 40 Years: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND: The surgical management of type II superior labrum anterior and posterior (SLAP) tears in patients younger than 40 years is controversial, but growing evidence suggests comparable outcomes between primary SLAP repair and primary biceps tenodesis, with lower rates of reoperations after pr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sandler, Alexis B., Childs, Benjamin R., Scanaliato, John P., Dunn, John C., Parnes, Nata
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9720817/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36479458
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671221140364
_version_ 1784843635264585728
author Sandler, Alexis B.
Childs, Benjamin R.
Scanaliato, John P.
Dunn, John C.
Parnes, Nata
author_facet Sandler, Alexis B.
Childs, Benjamin R.
Scanaliato, John P.
Dunn, John C.
Parnes, Nata
author_sort Sandler, Alexis B.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The surgical management of type II superior labrum anterior and posterior (SLAP) tears in patients younger than 40 years is controversial, but growing evidence suggests comparable outcomes between primary SLAP repair and primary biceps tenodesis, with lower rates of reoperations after primary biceps tenodesis. Given the relatively similar patient-reported outcomes, cost-effectiveness analyses of direct and indirect costs associated with the two procedures propound a valuable comparative technique. HYPOTHESIS: In this value-based comparison of SLAP repair versus biceps tenodesis, we hypothesized that biceps tenodesis would be more cost-effective than SLAP repair in patients younger than 40 years. STUDY DESIGN: Economic and decision analysis; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A 1-month Markov cycle was simulated to reflect 10 years of health outcomes. Health states were selected based on outcomes that are especially important in assessing indirect costs for a younger, active patient population: return-to-sport rates, which demonstrate a return to baseline function, and reoperation rates. Transition state probabilities were obtained through an index systematic review and meta-analysis comparing labral repair and biceps tenodesis for the treatment of type II SLAP lesions in patients younger than 40 years. Health state utility and cost values were obtained from accepted values denoted in existing literature. RESULTS: Both primary SLAP repair and primary biceps tenodesis yielded an average expected 8.1 quality-adjusted life years over the 10-year period. The average cost (in 2021 US$) was $16,619 for biceps tenodesis and $19,388 for SLAP repair. CONCLUSION: In a younger patient population, SLAP repair and biceps tenodesis had comparable quality-adjusted life years and utility in the treatment of type II SLAP tears; however, SLAP repair cost $19,388, while biceps tenodesis cost $16,619, reflecting a 14% cost savings with biceps tenodesis. These findings can be extrapolated to further establish the role for these procedures in treating SLAP tears.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9720817
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97208172022-12-06 SLAP Repair Versus Biceps Tenodesis in Patients Younger Than 40 Years: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Sandler, Alexis B. Childs, Benjamin R. Scanaliato, John P. Dunn, John C. Parnes, Nata Orthop J Sports Med Article BACKGROUND: The surgical management of type II superior labrum anterior and posterior (SLAP) tears in patients younger than 40 years is controversial, but growing evidence suggests comparable outcomes between primary SLAP repair and primary biceps tenodesis, with lower rates of reoperations after primary biceps tenodesis. Given the relatively similar patient-reported outcomes, cost-effectiveness analyses of direct and indirect costs associated with the two procedures propound a valuable comparative technique. HYPOTHESIS: In this value-based comparison of SLAP repair versus biceps tenodesis, we hypothesized that biceps tenodesis would be more cost-effective than SLAP repair in patients younger than 40 years. STUDY DESIGN: Economic and decision analysis; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A 1-month Markov cycle was simulated to reflect 10 years of health outcomes. Health states were selected based on outcomes that are especially important in assessing indirect costs for a younger, active patient population: return-to-sport rates, which demonstrate a return to baseline function, and reoperation rates. Transition state probabilities were obtained through an index systematic review and meta-analysis comparing labral repair and biceps tenodesis for the treatment of type II SLAP lesions in patients younger than 40 years. Health state utility and cost values were obtained from accepted values denoted in existing literature. RESULTS: Both primary SLAP repair and primary biceps tenodesis yielded an average expected 8.1 quality-adjusted life years over the 10-year period. The average cost (in 2021 US$) was $16,619 for biceps tenodesis and $19,388 for SLAP repair. CONCLUSION: In a younger patient population, SLAP repair and biceps tenodesis had comparable quality-adjusted life years and utility in the treatment of type II SLAP tears; however, SLAP repair cost $19,388, while biceps tenodesis cost $16,619, reflecting a 14% cost savings with biceps tenodesis. These findings can be extrapolated to further establish the role for these procedures in treating SLAP tears. SAGE Publications 2022-11-29 /pmc/articles/PMC9720817/ /pubmed/36479458 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671221140364 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Article
Sandler, Alexis B.
Childs, Benjamin R.
Scanaliato, John P.
Dunn, John C.
Parnes, Nata
SLAP Repair Versus Biceps Tenodesis in Patients Younger Than 40 Years: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
title SLAP Repair Versus Biceps Tenodesis in Patients Younger Than 40 Years: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
title_full SLAP Repair Versus Biceps Tenodesis in Patients Younger Than 40 Years: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
title_fullStr SLAP Repair Versus Biceps Tenodesis in Patients Younger Than 40 Years: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
title_full_unstemmed SLAP Repair Versus Biceps Tenodesis in Patients Younger Than 40 Years: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
title_short SLAP Repair Versus Biceps Tenodesis in Patients Younger Than 40 Years: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
title_sort slap repair versus biceps tenodesis in patients younger than 40 years: a cost-effectiveness analysis
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9720817/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36479458
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671221140364
work_keys_str_mv AT sandleralexisb slaprepairversusbicepstenodesisinpatientsyoungerthan40yearsacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT childsbenjaminr slaprepairversusbicepstenodesisinpatientsyoungerthan40yearsacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT scanaliatojohnp slaprepairversusbicepstenodesisinpatientsyoungerthan40yearsacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT dunnjohnc slaprepairversusbicepstenodesisinpatientsyoungerthan40yearsacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT parnesnata slaprepairversusbicepstenodesisinpatientsyoungerthan40yearsacosteffectivenessanalysis