Cost Comparison of Digital Nerve Repair Techniques.


Journal

Plastic and reconstructive surgery
ISSN: 1529-4242
Titre abrégé: Plast Reconstr Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 1306050

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
30 Jul 2024
Historique:
medline: 1 8 2024
pubmed: 1 8 2024
entrez: 31 7 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Direct cost comparison of nerve allograft with other techniques for repairing short digital nerve gaps are lacking. This study compares the costs of various techniques for digital nerve repair, anticipating significant cost increases for allograft implants. The State Ambulatory Surgery and Services Database for Florida, New York, and Wisconsin from 2015-2020 was used. Patients with primary repair, short autograft, conduit, and allograft were compared along total, surgical supply, operating room (OR), and anesthesia charges. Among 5,009 patients were 2,967 primary nerve repairs (59.2%), 77 autografts (1.5%), 1,647 conduits (32.9%), and 318 allografts (6.3%). 2,886 patients were male (57.6%) with mean age 40.4 ± 16.3 years. Over the study period, primary repairs decreased (63.9% in 2015 to 56.3% in 2020) while allografts increased significantly (8.8% in 2018 to 12.6% in 2020).Median total charges significantly varied across procedures, with the most expensive being allograft ($35,295), followed by conduit ($25,717), autograft ($24,749), and primary repair ($18,767). On multivariable regression, allograft is significantly more expensive than autograft for total charges by $11,224 (95CI: $4,196-$18,252) and supply charges by $10,484 (95CI: $6,073-$14,896), but not for OR or anesthesia charges. Flexor tendon repair was associated with greater total, OR, and anesthesia charges but similar supply charges. Nerve allograft is the most expensive digital nerve repair technique most likely due to the cost of the implant. To minimize health care expenditure and ensure equitable patient access, surgeons should consider this cost along with clinical factors in choosing digital nerve repair techniques.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39085087
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000011662
pii: 00006534-990000000-02390
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflicts of Interest and Source of Funding: The authors report no conflicts of interest and received no funding for the work presented.

Auteurs

Kevin Hu (K)

Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.

Mica C G Williams (MCG)

Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.

Alexander J Kammien (AJ)

Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.

Joseph Canner (J)

Department of Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.

Thayer Mukherjee (T)

Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.

Elspeth Hill (E)

Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.

David Colen (D)

Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.

Classifications MeSH