ArticleBMC ophthalmology2014
The cost-effectiveness of the Argus II retinal prosthesis in Retinitis Pigmentosa patients.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Brain-computer interface commercialization.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Retinitis Pigmentosa and Therapeutic Approaches: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Bridging the gap of vision restoration.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2024Review
- Are We Capturing the Socioeconomic Burden of Rare Genetic Disease? A Scoping Review of Economic Evaluations and Cost-of-Illness Studies.PharmacoEconomics · 2023Article
- Gene-agnostic approaches to treating inherited retinal degenerations.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2023Review
- Challenges of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Novel Therapeutics for Inherited Retinal Diseases.American journal of ophthalmology · 2022Review
- Intravenous infusion of small umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells could enhance safety and delay retinal degeneration in RCS rats.BMC ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Safety, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of Argus II in patients with retinitis pigmentosa: a systematic review.International journal of ophthalmology · 2021Review
- Quantitative analyses of factors related to anxiety and depression in patients with retinitis pigmentosa.PloS one · 2018Article
- The Argus-II Retinal Prosthesis Implantation; From the Global to Local Successful Experience.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2018Article
- Electronic retinal implants and artificial vision: journey and present.Eye (London, England) · 2017Review
- Utilizing Zebrafish Visual Behaviors in Drug Screening for Retinal Degeneration.International journal of molecular sciences · 2017Review
- Worldwide Argus II implantation: recommendations to optimize patient outcomes.BMC ophthalmology · 2016Review
- Retinal Prosthesis System for Advanced Retinitis Pigmentosa: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2016Review
- Chapter 1 - Restoring Vision to the Blind: The New Age of Implanted Visual Prostheses.Translational vision science & technology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRetinitis Pigmentosa (RP) is a hereditary genetic disease causing bilateral retinal degeneration. RP is a leading cause of blindness resulting in incurable visual impairment and drastic reduction in the Quality of life of the patients. Second Sight Medical Products Inc. developed Argus II, a retinal prosthesis system for treating RP. Argus II is the world's first ever-commercial implant intended to restore some vision in the blind patients. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of the Argus® II Retinal Prosthesis System (Argus II) in Retinitis Pigmentosa (RP) patients.
methodA multi -state transition Markov model was developed to determine the cost-effectiveness of Argus II versus usual care in RP from the perspective of healthcare payer. A hypothetical cohort of 1000 RP patients aged 46 years followed up over a (lifetime) 25-year time horizon. Health outcomes were expressed as quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and direct healthcare costs expressed in 2012 €. Results are reported as incremental cost per ratios (ICERs) with outcomes and costs discounted at an annual rate of 3.5%.
resultsThe ICER for Argus II was €14,603/QALY. Taking into account the uncertainty in model inputs the ICER was €14,482/QALY in the probabilistic analysis. In the scenarios of an assumption of no reduction on cost across model visual acuity states or a model time horizon as short as 10 years the ICER increased to €31,890/QALY and €49,769/QALY respectively.
conclusionThis economic evaluation shows that Argus II is a cost-effective intervention compared to usual care of the RP patients. The lifetime analysis ICER for Argus II falls below the published societal willingness to pay of EuroZone countries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.