Cost-effectiveness analysis of prophylactic laser peripheral iridotomy for primary angle-closure suspect in Japan

Background/ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of prophylactic laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI) with that of observation for primary angle-closure suspect (PACS) in Japan.Subjects/MethodsA Markov model was developed to compare the costs and utilities of prophylactic LPI with those of observation of 40-year-old patients with PACS. In the model with a yearly cycle over a 20-year time horizon, the disease was postulated to irreversibly progress from PACS to primary angle closure, followed by primary angle-closure glaucoma, unilateral blindness, and bilateral blindness. The parameters were estimated mainly based on a recent randomised controlled trial and analyses of Japanese claims data. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was estimated from the healthcare payer's perspective and evaluated at the willingness-to-pay 5 million Japanese Yen per quality-adjusted life-year. The observation period and the age at entry into the cohort was changed to account for a variety of clinical courses in sensitivity analyses. We conducted one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis with Monte Carlo simulations with 10 000 iterations.ResultsThe incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of LPI was 2,287,662 Japanese Yen (14,298 pounds sterling) per quality-adjusted life-year, which was below the willingness-to-pay threshold. The ratios were approximately 4 and 8 million in the 15-year and 10-year time horizons, respectively. Increasing the age at entry had little influence on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated that the results were robust.ConclusionsOur results indicate that prophylactic LPI for middle-aged patients with PACS is cost-effective in Japan.

Automated summary

Prophylactic LPI is cost-effective for middle-aged patients with PACS in Japan.