Cost-effectiveness analysis of intralesional and perilesional recombinant human epidermal growth factor vs hydrocolloid therapy in venous ulcer treatment in the Colombian context.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a comparative analysis of health care expenses and outcomes in response to the question: What is the cost-effectiveness of intralesional and perilesional recombinant human epidermal growth factor (rhEGF) compared with hydrocolloid therapy in patients diagnosed with chronic venous insufficiency without infection in Colombia?

METHODS

A Markov model was used to determine cost effectiveness over a 5-year period, considering the perspective of the health system in Colombia. The study included patients aged >18 years diagnosed with chronic venous insufficiency and used clinical studies to calculate the probabilities of epithelialization, infection, recurrence, and mortality.

RESULTS

RhEGF is more expensive per unit than hydrocolloids, but it is proven to be effective at healing ulcers in 8 to 12 weeks, even in complex cases. Hydrocolloids, in contrast, typically require 29.5 weeks on average, and ≤46 weeks for complex cases. Despite the cost, rhEGF is more cost effective because it achieves results comparable with hydrocolloid therapy at a lower cost per additional quality-adjusted life-year.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on cost-effectiveness analysis, rhEGF is a superior alternative to hydrocolloids for treating venous ulcers in Colombia. Not only is it more affordable, but it also enhances patients' quality of life and streamlines the health care system's resource use.