Direct costs associated with the management of progressive early onset scoliosis: Estimations based on gold standard technique or with magnetically controlled growing rods

Abstract

Level IV, economic and decision analyses, retrospective study.

Traditional growing rod versus magnetically controlled growing rod for treatment of early onset scoliosis: Cost analysis from implantation till skeletal maturity

“…Hence, it is important for our model to analyze the costs to health care and patient separately. This is visibly different from the health-care systems represented in France, 22 United Kingdom, 24 and the United States. 23 It is also important to note that unlike Charroin et al 22 and Rolton et al, 24 our model is based on an entire treatment plan for an EOS patient from initial surgery to skeletal maturity.…”

“…Hence, having similar TGR and MCGR complication rate parameters for our model creation is a more realistic representation than the previous cost analyzes. [22][23][24] MCGR aside, calculations of other implant costs were based on references provided by Medtronic ® for the CD Horizon ® Legacy TM instrumentation system. Although the cost is subject to variations between different countries of origin and users with different instrumentation strategies, this is the cheapest system available to us and can help limit the effect of implant variability on our model.…”

“…This has the benefit of reduced anesthetic and surgical risks, cost for surgical consumables, and duration of intensive care stay. Several cost analysis studies [22][23][24] have attempted to compare the TGR and MCGR in terms of associated costs and have found the MCGR to be cost saving in comparison to the TGR. However, several flaws of these studies include short-term follow-up with limited outlook on the risk of complications with prolonged use of the MCGR and the cost of rod exchanges.…”

The use of magnetically controlled growing rod device for pediatric scoliosis

“…Charroin et al20 published their study regarding the costs of the management of EOS in France, comparing the TGR with MCGR technique. The estimated direct costs of TGR in 4 years were €49,067 (USD 61,380) and €42,752 (USD 53,477) for MCGR strategies.…”

“…However, this technique requires the invasiveness of repeated distractions, with associated anesthetic and surgical risks 9,10,15-17. The TGR is also associated with many socioeconomic drawbacks, like costs of the repeated operations, miss of school time by the children, and time off work by the parents 18-20…”