Which treatment strategy for irreparable rotator cuff tears is most cost‐effective? A Markov model‐based cost‐utility analysis comparing superior capsular reconstruction, lower trapezius tendon transfer, subacromial balloon spacer implantation and reverse shoulder arthroplasty

Abstract Purpose Treatment options for irreparable rotator cuff tears (IRCTs) remain controversial and include superior capsular reconstruction (SCR), lower trapezius tendon transfer (LTTT), subacromial balloon spacer (SABS), and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Despite reports of positive treat...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jacob F. Oeding, Kyle N. Kunze, Ayoosh Pareek, Kristian Samuelsson
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2025-01-01
Series:Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/jeo2.70180
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849328504528699392
author Jacob F. Oeding
Kyle N. Kunze
Ayoosh Pareek
Kristian Samuelsson
author_facet Jacob F. Oeding
Kyle N. Kunze
Ayoosh Pareek
Kristian Samuelsson
author_sort Jacob F. Oeding
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Purpose Treatment options for irreparable rotator cuff tears (IRCTs) remain controversial and include superior capsular reconstruction (SCR), lower trapezius tendon transfer (LTTT), subacromial balloon spacer (SABS), and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Despite reports of positive treatment responses with all approaches, the relative clinical benefit in the context of associated cost has not been well delineated. The purpose of this study was to determine the most cost‐effective treatment strategy among SCR, LTTT, SABS, and RSA for patients with massive IRCTs. Methods A Markov Chain Monte Carlo probabilistic model was developed to evaluate the outcomes and costs of 1000 simulated patients undergoing either SCR, LTTT, SABS, or RSA for massive IRCTs. Upfront costs, health utility values, and reoperation rates including revisions and conversion to RSA were derived from the published literature. Outcome measures included costs, quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs), and the incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results Mean total costs of SCR, RSA, LTTT, and SABS were $30,540 ± 5,770, $26,896 ± 5,622, $25,819 ± 4,325, and $16,412 ± 2,583, respectively. On average, total QALYs from SCR, RSA, LTTT, and SABS were 6.17 ± 0.53, 3.78 ± 0.38, 5.33 ± 0.49, and 5.59 ± 0.48. Overall, SCR was determined the preferred, most cost‐effective strategy in 60% of patients included in the microsimulation model, with SABS the optimal strategy in 31% of cases and LTTT the optimal strategy in 9% of cases. Conclusion SCR was found to be the most cost‐effective treatment option for IRCTs based on the current microsimulation and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, although LTTT and SABS were also found to be cost‐effective in select patients. Given that this statistical model does not consider the unique experiences of individual patients, shared decision‐making remains an important component in determining the optimal treatment strategy for IRCTs. Level of Evidence Level III, economic decision model.
format Article
id doaj-art-2eee818d7c2e40eabde84caf9bf24f62
institution Kabale University
issn 2197-1153
language English
publishDate 2025-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
spelling doaj-art-2eee818d7c2e40eabde84caf9bf24f622025-08-20T03:47:36ZengWileyJournal of Experimental Orthopaedics2197-11532025-01-01121n/an/a10.1002/jeo2.70180Which treatment strategy for irreparable rotator cuff tears is most cost‐effective? A Markov model‐based cost‐utility analysis comparing superior capsular reconstruction, lower trapezius tendon transfer, subacromial balloon spacer implantation and reverse shoulder arthroplastyJacob F. Oeding0Kyle N. Kunze1Ayoosh Pareek2Kristian Samuelsson3Department of Orthopaedics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy University of Gothenburg Gothenburg SwedenDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery Hospital for Special Surgery New York New York USADepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery Hospital for Special Surgery New York New York USADepartment of Orthopaedics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy University of Gothenburg Gothenburg SwedenAbstract Purpose Treatment options for irreparable rotator cuff tears (IRCTs) remain controversial and include superior capsular reconstruction (SCR), lower trapezius tendon transfer (LTTT), subacromial balloon spacer (SABS), and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Despite reports of positive treatment responses with all approaches, the relative clinical benefit in the context of associated cost has not been well delineated. The purpose of this study was to determine the most cost‐effective treatment strategy among SCR, LTTT, SABS, and RSA for patients with massive IRCTs. Methods A Markov Chain Monte Carlo probabilistic model was developed to evaluate the outcomes and costs of 1000 simulated patients undergoing either SCR, LTTT, SABS, or RSA for massive IRCTs. Upfront costs, health utility values, and reoperation rates including revisions and conversion to RSA were derived from the published literature. Outcome measures included costs, quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs), and the incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results Mean total costs of SCR, RSA, LTTT, and SABS were $30,540 ± 5,770, $26,896 ± 5,622, $25,819 ± 4,325, and $16,412 ± 2,583, respectively. On average, total QALYs from SCR, RSA, LTTT, and SABS were 6.17 ± 0.53, 3.78 ± 0.38, 5.33 ± 0.49, and 5.59 ± 0.48. Overall, SCR was determined the preferred, most cost‐effective strategy in 60% of patients included in the microsimulation model, with SABS the optimal strategy in 31% of cases and LTTT the optimal strategy in 9% of cases. Conclusion SCR was found to be the most cost‐effective treatment option for IRCTs based on the current microsimulation and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, although LTTT and SABS were also found to be cost‐effective in select patients. Given that this statistical model does not consider the unique experiences of individual patients, shared decision‐making remains an important component in determining the optimal treatment strategy for IRCTs. Level of Evidence Level III, economic decision model.https://doi.org/10.1002/jeo2.70180cost‐effectivenessirreparable rotator cuff tearMarkov modelreverse shoulder arthroplastysuperior capsular reconstruction
spellingShingle Jacob F. Oeding
Kyle N. Kunze
Ayoosh Pareek
Kristian Samuelsson
Which treatment strategy for irreparable rotator cuff tears is most cost‐effective? A Markov model‐based cost‐utility analysis comparing superior capsular reconstruction, lower trapezius tendon transfer, subacromial balloon spacer implantation and reverse shoulder arthroplasty
Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
cost‐effectiveness
irreparable rotator cuff tear
Markov model
reverse shoulder arthroplasty
superior capsular reconstruction
title Which treatment strategy for irreparable rotator cuff tears is most cost‐effective? A Markov model‐based cost‐utility analysis comparing superior capsular reconstruction, lower trapezius tendon transfer, subacromial balloon spacer implantation and reverse shoulder arthroplasty
title_full Which treatment strategy for irreparable rotator cuff tears is most cost‐effective? A Markov model‐based cost‐utility analysis comparing superior capsular reconstruction, lower trapezius tendon transfer, subacromial balloon spacer implantation and reverse shoulder arthroplasty
title_fullStr Which treatment strategy for irreparable rotator cuff tears is most cost‐effective? A Markov model‐based cost‐utility analysis comparing superior capsular reconstruction, lower trapezius tendon transfer, subacromial balloon spacer implantation and reverse shoulder arthroplasty
title_full_unstemmed Which treatment strategy for irreparable rotator cuff tears is most cost‐effective? A Markov model‐based cost‐utility analysis comparing superior capsular reconstruction, lower trapezius tendon transfer, subacromial balloon spacer implantation and reverse shoulder arthroplasty
title_short Which treatment strategy for irreparable rotator cuff tears is most cost‐effective? A Markov model‐based cost‐utility analysis comparing superior capsular reconstruction, lower trapezius tendon transfer, subacromial balloon spacer implantation and reverse shoulder arthroplasty
title_sort which treatment strategy for irreparable rotator cuff tears is most cost effective a markov model based cost utility analysis comparing superior capsular reconstruction lower trapezius tendon transfer subacromial balloon spacer implantation and reverse shoulder arthroplasty
topic cost‐effectiveness
irreparable rotator cuff tear
Markov model
reverse shoulder arthroplasty
superior capsular reconstruction
url https://doi.org/10.1002/jeo2.70180
work_keys_str_mv AT jacobfoeding whichtreatmentstrategyforirreparablerotatorcufftearsismostcosteffectiveamarkovmodelbasedcostutilityanalysiscomparingsuperiorcapsularreconstructionlowertrapeziustendontransfersubacromialballoonspacerimplantationandreverseshoulderarthroplasty
AT kylenkunze whichtreatmentstrategyforirreparablerotatorcufftearsismostcosteffectiveamarkovmodelbasedcostutilityanalysiscomparingsuperiorcapsularreconstructionlowertrapeziustendontransfersubacromialballoonspacerimplantationandreverseshoulderarthroplasty
AT ayooshpareek whichtreatmentstrategyforirreparablerotatorcufftearsismostcosteffectiveamarkovmodelbasedcostutilityanalysiscomparingsuperiorcapsularreconstructionlowertrapeziustendontransfersubacromialballoonspacerimplantationandreverseshoulderarthroplasty
AT kristiansamuelsson whichtreatmentstrategyforirreparablerotatorcufftearsismostcosteffectiveamarkovmodelbasedcostutilityanalysiscomparingsuperiorcapsularreconstructionlowertrapeziustendontransfersubacromialballoonspacerimplantationandreverseshoulderarthroplasty