Is Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction Cost-effective?

OBJECTIVE:This manuscript is the first to employ rigorous methodological criteria to critically appraise a surgical preventative technique for breast cancer-related lymphedema from a cost-utility standpoint. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA:Breast cancer-related lymphedema is a well-documented complication of breast cancer survivors in the US. In this study, we conduct a cost-utility analysis to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the LYMPHA. METHODS:Lymphedema rates after each of the following surgical options(1) ALND, (2) ALND + LYMPHA, (3) ALND + RLNR, (4) ALND + RLNR + LYMPHA were extracted from a recently published meta-analysis. Procedural costs were calculated using Medicare reimbursement rates. Average utility scores were obtained for each health state using a visual analog scale, then converted to quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). A decision tree was generated and incremental cost-utility ratios (ICUR) were calculated. Multiple sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate our findings. RESULTS:ALND with LYMPHA was more cost-effective with an ICUR of $1587.73/QALY. In the decision tree rollback analysis, a clinical effectiveness gain of 1.35 QALY justified an increased incremental cost of $2140. Similarly, the addition of LYMPHA to ALND with RLNR was more cost-effective with an ICUR of $699.84/QALY. In the decision tree rollback analysis, a clinical effectiveness gain of 2.98 QALY justified a higher incremental cost of $2085.00. CONCLUSIONS:Our study supports that the addition of LYMPHA to both ALND or ALND with RLNR is the more cost-effective treatment option.