Pharmacoeconomic Evaluation of Costs of Myelomeningocele and Meningocele Treatment and Screening

Abstract

Background

The prevention of myelomeningocele (MMC) and meningocele (MC) is a public health concern. A systematic review on economic factors associated with MMC and MC can help the policy makers to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of screening and treatment. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review to provide up-to date pharmacoeconomic evidence of all economic studies present in literature on different aspects of MMC and MC.

Methods

We searched in the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHSEED), PubMed, Cost-effectiveness Analysis Registry (CEA Registry), Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD), Health Technology Assessment Database (HTAD), Cochrane Library, and Econlit. The PRISMA guidelines were followed in the search and evaluation of literature. Only articles in English not limited by the year of publication that fulfilled the eligibility criteria were included in this systematic review.

Results

Nineteen papers were included in the study. The studies were very heterogeneous and reported a comparison of the costs between prenatal versus postnatal repair, the cost of fetoscopic approach versus open surgery, the cost of ventriculoperitoneal shunting (VPS) versus endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV), and ETV with choroid plexus cauterization (ETV/CPC), the cost of hospitalization, and the cost of diagnosis for MMC.

Conclusion

The results of this study can help in implementing new policies in different countries to assist MC and MMC patients with the cost of treatment and screening.

Keywords:

• cost
• myelomeningocele
• meningocele
• neural tube defects
• pharmacoeconomic

Abbreviations

MC, meningocele; MEC, meningoencephalocele; MMC, myelomeningocele; NTD, Neural tube defects.

Author Contributions

All authors made a significant contribution to the work reported, whether that is in the conception, study design, execution, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation, or in all these areas; took part in drafting, revising or critically reviewing the article; gave final approval of the version to be published; have agreed on the journal to which the article has been submitted; and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Disclosure

The authors declare that they have no competing interests for this work.

Additional information

Funding

There is no funding to report.