ArticleCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2026
External fixation versus amputation in the treatment of ulcerated diabetic foot: a cost-utility analysis using real-world data and a discrete-event simulation model.
Article in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiabetic foot is a severe complication of diabetes mellitus, with a significant impact on patients’ quality of life. The traditional treatment has been amputation, but its high mortality rate has prompted a search for alternatives, such as the resection of non-viable tissue and limb stabilization using external fixation. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness relationship between these two strategies.
methodsAn assessment was made of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), calculated over a ten-year time horizon, of both amputation and external fixation. The analysis was based on clinical and cost data obtained from a previous study and used a discrete event simulation model.
resultsThe mean ten-year quality-adjusted life expectancy for amputated patients was 2.641 ± 1.64 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) as compared with 6.627 ± 1.46 QALYs for patients treated with external fixation (p < 0.001). The average cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) was estimated at €29,717/QALY for amputation and €15,360/QALY for external fixation. A comparison between both options resulted in an ICER of €5,847/QALY. Sensitivity analyses found ICER values ranging between €5,847/QALY and €12,296/QALY. A budget impact analysis revealed that the incorporation of the new treatment alternative into the Spanish National Health System would lead to a budget increase of €528.2 million over a ten-year horizon.
conclusionsThe use of external fixation in the treatment of ulcerated diabetic foot was shown to be a cost-effective option compared to major amputations.
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.