Amerikanische Gesellschaft für Hirudotherapie

Cost-Effectiveness of Vioptix versus Clinical Examination for Flap Monitoring of Autologous Free Tissue Breast Reconstruction.

Research article published in Plastic and reconstructive surgery (2021)

Zuletzt aktualisiert: June 18, 2026Geprüft von: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Observational studyKlinische StudienSchoenbrunner et al. · Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 2021

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Vioptix is a near-infrared spectroscopy tissue oximetry technology that allows for noninvasive monitoring of flap perfusion. Despite the reported benefits of Vioptix, the cost-effectiveness of this flap monitoring technology has not been compared to clinical examination alone. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness model, from the patient perspective, was constructed with two treatment arms: clinical examination versus clinical examination combined with Vioptix for flap monitoring after autologous, free flap breast reconstruction. Costs, utilities, and other model inputs were identified from the literature. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Gamma distributions were created for cost variables, and beta distributions were created for probability variables. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio under $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) was considered cost-effective. All analyses were performed using TreeAge Pro (Williamstown, Mass.). RESULTS: Mean cost of autologous free tissue transfer breast reconstruction with clinical examination-based flap monitoring was found to be $37,561 with an effectiveness of 0.79, whereas the mean cost of clinical examination with Vioptix for flap monitoring was $39,361 with effectiveness of 0.82. This yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $60,507 for clinical examination combined with Vioptix for flap monitoring. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that clinical examination with Vioptix became cost-effective when the cost of Vioptix was less than $1487. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis found that clinical examination was cost-effective in 86.5 percent of cases. CONCLUSION: Although clinical examination combined with Vioptix is minimally more effective for flap monitoring after autologous, free flap breast reconstruction, clinical examination alone is the more cost-effective flap monitoring option.

Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.

Publication typeComparative StudyJournal Article
Indexed MeSH termsCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleFree Tissue FlapsHumansMammaplastyModels, EconomicMonitoring, AmbulatoryOximetryPhysical ExaminationPostoperative ComplicationsQuality-Adjusted Life YearsSpectroscopy, Near-Infrared

Zusammenfassung

Vioptix is a near-infrared spectroscopy tissue oximetry technology that allows for noninvasive monitoring of flap perfusion. Despite the reported benefits of Vioptix, the cost-effectiveness of this flap monitoring technology has not been compared to clinical examination alone.

Warum dies für die Hirudotherapie relevant ist

This cost-effectiveness modeling study compared clinical examination alone versus clinical examination combined with Vioptix near-infrared spectroscopy tissue oximetry for flap monitoring after autologous free flap breast reconstruction, finding that clinical examination alone was more cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $60,507 for the Vioptix arm). The relevance to ASH's domain is indirect: while leech therapy may be used for flap venous congestion, this article does not mention leeches, hirudotherapy, or leech-derived substances. The study focuses on postoperative monitoring technology cost-effectiveness from the patient perspective. No abstract content connects to hirudotherapy beyond the shared context of free flap surgery, where leeches may occasionally serve as an adjunctive salvage measure.

Zitation

Cost-Effectiveness of Vioptix versus Clinical Examination for Flap Monitoring of Autologous Free Tissue Breast Reconstruction.

Schoenbrunner et al. · Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 2021

Verwandter klinischer Kontext

Zur ASH-Bibliothek hinzugefügt: May 28, 2026 · Letzte Aktualisierung der Website: June 18, 2026

Diese Website stellt Bildungsinformationen bereit und ist weder eine medizinische Beratung noch eine Diagnose oder Behandlungsempfehlung. Die medizinische Blutegeltherapie ist mit klinisch relevanten Risiken verbunden und sollte ausschließlich von qualifizierten Klinikerinnen und Klinikern unter institutionell genehmigten Protokollen durchgeführt werden. Die FDA-510(k)-Zulassung für medizinische Blutegel ist auf bestimmte Indikationen beschränkt; experimentelle und Off-Label-Diskussionen werden entsprechend gekennzeichnet. Für patientenspezifische Beratung wenden Sie sich an eine qualifizierte Gesundheitsfachkraft.