Budget impact analysis of the XEN® gel stent implant for glaucoma treatment

References

• Aptel F, Cucherat M, Denis P. Efficacy and tolerability of prostaglandin analogues. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials. J Glaucoma. 2008;17:667–673.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasmussen CA, Kaufman PL. Novel therapeutic approaches for glaucoma. Drugs Future. 2011;36:287–300.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malihi M, Moura Filho ER, Hodge DO, et al. Long-term trends in glaucoma-related blindness in Olmsted County, Minnesota. Ophthalmology. 2014;121(1):134–141.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heijl A, Bengtsson B, Oskarsdottir SE. Prevalence and severity of undetected manifest glaucoma: results from the early manifest glaucoma trial screening. Ophthalmology. 2013;120(8):1541–1545.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tham Y-C, Li X, Wong TY, et al. Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology. 2014;121(11):2081–2090.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bagnis A, Papadia M, Scotto R, et al. Antiglaucoma drugs: the role of preservative-free formulations. Saudi J Ophthalmol. 2011;25(4):389–394.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Glaucoma: diagnosis and management. Clinical guideline [CG85]. 2009. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg85/chapter/Key-priorities-for-implementation
   Google Scholar
• Quigley HA, Broman AT. The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006;90:262–267.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richter GM, Coleman AL. Minimally invasive glaucoma surgery: current status and future prospects. Clin Ophthalmol. 2016;10:189–206.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bovee CE, Pasquale LR. Evolving surgical interventions in the treatment of glaucoma. Semin Ophthalmol. 2016;29:1–5.
   Google Scholar
• Saheb H, Ahmed IIK. Micro-invasive glaucoma surgery: current perspectives and future directions. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2012;23(2):96–104.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Indicadores y Ejes de análisis del CMBD. [Indicators and Axes of analysis of the MBDS]. Available from: http://www.icmbd.es/login-success.do
   Google Scholar
• Wellik SR, Dale EA. A review of the iStent® trabecular micro-bypass stent: safety and efficacy. Clin Ophthalmol. 2015;9:677–684.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fea A, Cannizzo PM, Consolandi G, et al. Managing drawbacks in unconventional successful glaucoma surgery: a case report of stent exposure. Case Rep Ophthalmol Med. 2015;2015:847439.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dupont G, Collignon N. [New surgical approach in primary open-angle glaucoma: XEN® gel stent a minimally invasive technique]. Rev Med Liege. 2016;71(2):90–93.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sheybani A, Lenzhofer M, Hohensinn M, et al. Phacoemulsification combined with a new ab interno gel stent to treat open-angle glaucoma: pilot study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015;41(9):1905–1909.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D’Souza P. Pharma pricing & market access Europe 2016–health network communications’ tenth annual conference (February 23- 25,2016–London, UK). Drugs Today (Barc). 2016;52(3):203–206.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dervaux B, Baseilhac E, Fagon JY, et al. Medico-economic evaluation of health products in the context of the Social Security Financing Act for 2012. Therapie. 2013;68(4):253–263.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brosa M, Gisbert R, Rodríguez JM, et al. Principios, métodos y aplicaciones del análisis del impacto presupuestario en el sector sanitario [Principles, methods and applications of the analysis of the budgetary impact in the health sector]. Pharmacoecon Spa Res Art. 2005;2(2):65–78.
   Google Scholar
• Sullivan SD, Mauskopf JA, Augustovski F, et al. Budget impact analysis-principles of good practice: report of the ISPOR 2012 budget impact analysis good practice II task force. Value Health. 2014;17(1):5–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Consejería de Sanidad. Resolución de 30 de marzo de 2015, de la Directora, por la que se modifica la cuantía de los precios públicos de servicios sanitarios previstos en el Decreto 81/2009, de 16 de junio, que establece los precios públicos de los servicios sanitarios prestados por el Servicio Canario de la Salud y fija sus cuantías. Boletín Oficial de Canarias núm. 70, de 14 de abril de 2015. [Health Council (2015) Resolution of March 30th, 2015 from the Director, which modifies the amount of public prices of health services provided for in Decree 81/2009, June 16th, which establishes public prices of the health services provided by the Canary Islands Health Service and sets its amounts. Official Gazette of the Canary Islands no. 70, April 14th, 2015]. 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Consejería de Salud. Orden de 18 de noviembre de 2015. Boletín Oficial de la Junta de Andalucía nº 228, 24 noviembre 2015. [Health Council (2015) Order November 18th, 2015. Official Gazette of the Junta de Andalucía nº 228, November 24th, 2015]. 2015
   Google Scholar
• Departament de Salut. Ordre SLT/85/2015 de 8 de abril 2015. Diari Oficial de la Generalitat de Catalunya nº 6856, 22 abril 2015. [Department of Health (2015) Order SLT/85/2015 April 8th, 2015. Official Gazette of the Generalitat de Catalunya nº 6856, April 22, 2015]. 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Consellería de Sanidad. Decreto 56/2014, de 30 de abril. Diario Oficial de Galicia nº 96 pág. 22788, de 21 de mayo de 2014. [Department of Health (2014) Decree 56/2014, of April 30. Official Gazette of Galicia nº 96 pg. 22788, May 21th, 2014]. 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Servicio Navarro de Salud-Osasunbidea. RESOLUCIÓN 626/2014, de 5 de junio. Boletín Oficial de Navarra, nº 133, 9 julio 2014. [Navarro Health Service-Osasunbidea (2014) RESOLUTION 626/2014, June 5th. Official Bulletin of Navarra, nº 133, July 9th, 2014]. 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Consejería de Sanidad. Orden 731/2013 6 septiembre 2013. Boletín Oficial de la Comunidad de Madrid nº 215, 10 septiembre 2013. [Ministry of Health (2013). Order 731/2013 September 6th, 2013. Official Bulletin of the Community of Madrid nº 215, September 10th, 2013]. 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Consejería de Administración Pública y Hacienda. Orden 17/2014, de 16 de noviembre de 2014. Boletín Oficial de la Rioja, nº 156, 19 diciembre 2014. [Ministry of Public Administration and Finance (2014) Order 17/2014, November 16th, 2014. Official Gazette of La Rioja, nº 156, December 19th, 2014]. 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Departamento de Sanidad y consumo. Orden 14 diciembre 2011. Boletín Oficial del País Vasco nº 247, 30 diciembre 2011. [Department of Health and Consumption (2011). Order December 14th, 2011. Official Gazette of the Basque Country nº 247, December 30th, 2011]. 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Ministerio de Sanidad, Servicios Sociales e Igualdad. Instituto de Información Sanitaria. Registro de altas. CIE9 MC – CMBD 2014. [Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality. Institute of Health Information. (2014) Registration of registrations. ICD9 MC - CMBD 2014]. 2014. Available from: http://pestadistico.inteligenciadegestion.msssi.es/
   Google Scholar
• Institut Català de la Salut. Resolució SLT/353/2013 de 13 de febrero 2013. Diari Oficial de la Generalitat de Catalunya nº 6326, 1 marzo 2013. [Catalan Institute of Health (2013) Resolution SLT/353/2013 of February 13, 2013. Official Bulletin of the Generalitat de Catalunya núm. 6326, March 1st, 2013]. 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Consejo de administración del ente público Osakidetza. Acuerdo de 23 de febrero de 2015. Libro de tarifas. [Board of directors of the public body Osakidetza (2015) Agreement of February 23th, 2015. Book of fees]. 2015. Available from: http://osakidetza.euskadi.net/r85-ckproc05/es/contenidos/informacion/libro_tarifas/es_libro/tarifas.html
   Google Scholar
• Presidencia de la Generalitat. Ley 7/2014, de 22 de diciembre. Boletín Oficial del Estado, nº 35, 10 febrero 2015. [Presidency of the Generalitat (2014) Law 7/2014, of December 22th. Official Gazette of the State, nº 35, February 10th, 2015]. 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Servei de salut de les Illes Balears. Resolució del director general del Servei de Salut de modificació de l’annex I de l’Ordre de la Conselleria de Salut i Consum de 22 de desembre de 2006. Butlletí Oficial de les Illes Balears nº 89, de l’1 de juliol de 2014. [Health Service of the Balearic Islands (2014) Resolution of the Director General of the Health Service of modification of Annex I of the Order of the Ministry of Health and Consumption of December 22th, 2006. Official Bulletin of the Balearic Islands nº 89, from July 1st, 2014]. 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Consejería de Sanidad. RESOLUCIÓN de 21 de noviembre de 2011. Boletín Oficial de Castilla y León, nº 234, 5 diciembre 2011. [Ministry of Health (2011) RESOLUTION of November 21st, 2011. Official Gazette of Castilla y León, nº 234, December 5th, 2011]. 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Servicio de Salud de Castilla-La Mancha. Resolución 1 diciembre 2008. Diario Oficial de Castilla- La Mancha nº 267, 29 diciembre 2008. [Health Service of Castilla-La Mancha. (2008). Resolution December 1st,2008. Official Gazette of Castilla-La Mancha nº 267, December 29th, 2008]. 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Lichter PR, Musch DC, Gillespie BW, et al. Interim clinical outcomes in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study comparing initial treatment randomized to medications or surgery. Ophthalmology. 2001;108(11):1943–1953.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matlach J, Freiberg FJ, Leippi S, et al. Comparison of phacotrabeculectomy versus phacocanaloplasty in the treatment of patients with concomitant cataract and glaucoma. BMC Ophthalmol. 2013;13:1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konopińska J, Deniziak M, Saeed E, et al. Prospective randomized study comparing combined phaco-express and phacotrabeculectomy in open angle glaucoma treatment: 12-month follow-up. J Ophthalmol. 2015;2015:720109.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wang L, Sha F, Guo DD, et al. Efficacy and economic analysis of Ex-PRESS implantation versus trabeculectomy in uncontrolled glaucoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Ophthalmol. 2016;9(1):124–131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spiegel D, García-Feijoó J, García-Sánchez J, et al. Coexistent primary open-angle glaucoma and cataract: preliminary analysis of treatment by cataract surgery and the iStent trabecular micro-bypass stent. Adv Ther. 2008;25(5):453–456.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng JW, Cheng SW, Cai JP, et al. Systematic overview of the efficacy of nonpenetrating glaucoma surgery in the treatment of open angle glaucoma. Med Sci Monit. 2011;17(7):RA155–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rękas M, Byszewska A, Petz K, et al. Canaloplasty versus non-penetrating deep sclerectomy - a prospective, randomised study of the safety and efficacy of combined cataract and glaucoma surgery; 12-month follow-up. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2015;253(4):591–599.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheybani A, Dick HB, Ahmed II. Early clinical results of a novel ab interno gel stent for the surgical treatment of open-angle glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2016;25(7):e691–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maris PJ Jr, Ishida K, Netland PA. Comparison of trabeculectomy with Ex-PRESS miniature glaucoma device implanted under scleral flap. J Glaucoma. 2007;16(1):14–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malvankar-Mehta MS, Iordanous Y, Chen YN, et al. istent with phacoemulsification versus phacoemulsification alone for patients with glaucoma and cataract: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2015;10(7):e0131770.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Picht G, Mutsch Y, Grehn F. [Follow-up of trabeculectomy. Complications and therapeutic consequences]. Ophthalmologe. 2001;98(7):629–634.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oblikue Consulting. eSalud. Base de datos de información económica del sector sanitario. [Oblikue Consulting. eHealth. Database of economic information of the sanitary sector]. Available from: http://www.oblikue.com
   Google Scholar
• Lindblom B, Nordmann JP, Sellem E, et al. A multicentre, retrospective study of resource utilization and costs associated with glaucoma management in France and Sweden. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2006;84(1):74–83.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Thygesen J, Aagren M, Arnavielle S, et al. Late-stage, primary open-angle glaucoma in Europe: social and health care maintenance costs and quality of life of patients from 4 countries. Curr Med Res Opin. 2008;24(6):1763–1770.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kymes S, Azuara-Blanco A. Guidelines for economic evaluation of glaucoma surgical trials. In: Shaarawy TM, Sherwood MB, Grehn F, editors. World glaucoma association: guidelines on design and reporting of glaucoma surdical trials. Amsterdam: Kugler Publications; 2009. p. 41–46.
   Google Scholar
• Tuulonen A, Sintonen H. Health economics, cost-effectiveness, and glaucoma care. In: Krieglstein GK, Weinreb RN, editors. Essentials in ophthalmology. Berlin: Springer; 2006. p. 123–133.
   Google Scholar