Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Regenerative Endodontics versus MTA Apexification.

INTRODUCTION

With the introduction of stem cell engineering in dentistry, regenerative endodontics has emerged as a potential alternative to mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) apexification in the management of necrotic immature permanent teeth. However, the utility of this modality in terms of cost-effectiveness has not yet been established. Therefore, we performed cost-effectiveness analysis to determine the dominant treatment modality that would influence decision making from the private payer perspective.

METHODS

A Markov model was constructed with a necrotic immature permanent tooth in a 7-y-old patient, followed over the lifetime using TreeAge Pro Healthcare 2022. Transition probabilities were estimated based on the existing literature. Costs were estimated based on United States health care, and cost-effectiveness was determined using Monte Carlo microsimulations. The model was validated internally by sensitivity analyses, and face validation was performed by an experienced endodontist and health economist.

RESULTS

In the base-case scenario, regenerative endodontics did not turn out to be a dominant treatment option as it was associated with an additional cost of USD$1,012 and fewer retained tooth-years (15.48 y). Likewise, in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, regenerative endodontics was again dominated by apexification against different willingness-to-pay values.

CONCLUSION

Based on current evidence, regenerative endodontic treatment was not cost-effective compared with apexification in the management of necrotic immature permanent teeth over an individual's lifetime.

KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT

The study provides valuable insight regarding the cost valuation and cost-efficacy of regenerative endodontic treatment versus apexification in the management of necrotic immature permanent teeth, as this would aid in effective clinical decision making, allowing for the functional allocation of resources.