Background The standard treatments for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) include laser photocoagulation of the avascular retina and intravitreal injections of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents. While laser photocoagulation is effective, it may lead to poor visual development. Conversely, the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor antibody, ranibizumab, is associated with a high recurrence rate. It is therefore important to consider the cost-effectiveness of these treatments. This study evaluated the three-year cost-effectiveness of ranibizumab vs. laser photocoagulation for ROP treatment. Methods This study performed cost-effectiveness analysis using a decision tree and Markov model, from both societal and public healthcare perspectives. Ranibizumab or laser photocoagulation was initially administered, and either treatment was added if ROP recurred. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated from a public healthcare perspective. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results Comparing ranibizumab with laser photocoagulation, ICER was approximately 67,000 yen over the three-year analysis period. This is below the upper limit of the willingness-to-pay threshold in Japan of 7.5 million yen and is considered highly cost-effective. Conclusion Intravitreal ranibizumab for ROP has a better visual prognosis than retinal photocoagulation. It is more cost-effective and considered useful for selecting a treatment method, even if it increases the number of outpatient visits and requires additional treatment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Higuchi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: