Background: Previous findings from a clinical trial demonstrated noninferiority of Leukocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) compared to commercially available fibrin sealants in preventing postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leakage, necessitating intervention. This cost-effectiveness evaluation aims to assess the value-for-money of both techniques for dural closure in supratentorial and infratentorial surgeries.
Methods: Cost-effectiveness was estimated from a health care payer's perspective alongside a randomized clinical trial comprising 328 patients. The analysis focused on clinical and health-related quality of life outcomes, as well as direct medical costs including inpatient costs, imaging and laboratory costs, and outpatient follow up costs up to twelve weeks after surgery.
Results: Clinical and health-related quality of life data showed no significant differences between L-PRF (EuroQol five dimensions questionnaire 0.75 ± 0.25, 36-item Short Form Survey 63.93% ± 20.42) and control (EuroQol five dimensions questionnaire 0.72 ± 0.22, 36-item Short Form Survey 60.93% ± 20.78) groups. Pharmaceutical expenses during initial hospitalization were significantly lower in the L-PRF group (€190.4, interquartile range 149.9) than in the control group (€394.4, interquartile range 364.3), while other cost categories did not show any significant differences, resulting in an average cost advantage of €204 per patient favoring L-PRF.
Conclusions: This study demonstrates L-PRF as a cost-effective alternative for commercially available fibrin sealants in dural closure. Implementing L-PRF can lead to substantial cost savings, particularly considering the frequency of these procedures.
Keywords: Cerebrospinal fluid leakage; Cost-effectiveness; Dural closure; Leukocyte-and platelet-rich fibrin; Prevention.
Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.