OBJECTIVES: To perform cost-effectiveness analysis of using different types of monofocal intraocular lenses (IOL) for cataract surgery in adult patients in Russia.

METHODS: Analysis of the published clinical trials was conducted to evaluate efficacy and safety of using different types of monofocal IOLs - AcrySof® IOLs (Alcon), hydrophobic non-AcrySof® IOLs (HOYA, Abbott Medical Optics, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, 1stQ GmbH) and hydrophilic non-AcrySof® IOLs (HumanOptic, PTI, Eyeol UK Ltd., B&L, Ellis Ophthalmic Technologies, Appasamy Ocular Devices Ltd., Rayner, RUMEX International Ltd., i-Medical Ophthalmic International GmbH). MS Excel based model of medical care patients with cataract has been developed for 1 patient undergoing surgery treatment and based on the research hypothesis that the using AcrySof® IOLs associated with lower risk of posterior capsular opacification (PCO) over 3 years following cataract surgery. To measure costs of cataract treatment with different types of monofocal IOLs for the state budget were used “cost-effectiveness” analysis. Direct medical costs included IOLs cost, treatment of PCO with neodymium-doped uttrium aluminium garnet laser capsulotomy (Nd:YAG), side effects treatment associated with Nd:YAG and were calculated from the Russian healthcare system perspective. The incidence of successful cataract surgery over 3 years without PCO was included into the model as the effectiveness criteria.

RESULTS: The 3-year Nd:YAG incidence for AcrySof® IOLs was 2.4%, for hydrophobic non-AcrySof® IOLs – 5.1%, for hydrophilic non-AcrySof® IOLs – 10.9% (P.Ursell et al., 2017). The total costs of treatment cataract per patient were min $75 for AcrySof® Single Piece, Alcon and max $180 for Technics One® (ZCB00), Abbott Medical Optics. The difference between min and max costs amounted to $105 in favor of the AcrySof® IOL (rate for June 2018).

CONCLUSIONS: Using AcrySof® IOLs for cataract surgery in adult patients was effective and economically justified treatment option in Russia.