Objective: To compare the economic costs between two strategies for management of the small unruptured ectopic pregnancy: initial treatment with methotrexate versus initial treatment with laparoscopic salpingostomy.
Methods: We assumed that both treatment strategies would result in identical clinical outcomes: resolution of the ectopic pregnancy without maternal mortality or long-term morbidity. Based on a literature review, estimates were derived for the likely clinical outcomes of a single injection of methotrexate (50 mg/m2) and for the likely clinical outcomes of the laparoscopy strategy. A range of values was evaluated for the initial success rate of each strategy and varying assumptions made about the type of treatment modality used for initial treatment failures. Direct medical costs of each strategy were estimated based on actual reimbursement rates of a third-party payer for the components of each strategy. The treatment strategies were compared in best-case/worst-case scenarios to determine the potential range of differences in costs between the two strategies.
Results: The cost of the methotrexate strategy ranged from $438 to $1390, and the cost of laparoscopic salpingostomy ranged from $2506 to $2974; therefore, the methotrexate strategy was less costly than laparoscopy, with a cost difference ranging from $1124 (best-case laparoscopy-worst-case methotrexate scenario) to $2536 (worst-case laparoscopybest-case methotrexate scenario). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that initial therapy with methotrexate was less costly over a wide range of probability and cost estimates.
Conclusion: Initial methotrexate is a cost-effective alternative to laparoscopic salpingostomy in the treatment of the small unruptured ectopic pregnancy.
(C) 1996 The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists