Scholarlink

<p>Placenta-derived skin substitutes are marketed for post-Mohs wounds, but financial impact is uncertain. To estimate practice acquisition costs and modeled Medicare product reimbursement for placenta-derived products versus second-intention (SI) healing in two post-Mohs defects. In 2025, vendors provided pricing and coding inputs. We modeled (A) a 4 × 4&#xa0;cm forehead defect to temporalis fascia (16 cm<sup>2</sup>) treated weekly for 4 applications and (B) a 4 × 3.5&#xa0;cm medial foot defect to deep subcutaneous fat (14 cm<sup>2</sup>) treated weekly for 6 applications, using the smallest sheet with ≤ 10% waste. SI was modeled as supply-only clinic costs during the postoperative global period. For a 16 cm<sup>2</sup> defect, per-application acquisition ranged from $1,495 (MiMedx EpiFix 4 × 4.5&#xa0;cm) to $35,031 (Samaritan Biologics Complete AA); modeled Medicare product reimbursement ranged from $1,668 to $43,115 per application. Cumulative acquisition was $5,980–$140,125 (forehead) and $8,970–$210,187 (foot) versus SI $120–$320 and $180–$480. Inputs were company-reported; regional/contract variability was not assessed; closure times were modeled; SI excluded patient-reported outcomes and opportunity costs. Even moderate post-Mohs defects can generate large cumulative expenditures with placental substitutes. Pre-use cost modeling, accurate coding, waste minimization, and documentation of medical necessity should precede routine use.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Cost modeling of placenta-derived skin substitutes versus second-intention healing for post-mohs defects: a pricing inquiry and scenario analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月6日

查看全文
  • Mustufa Jafry,
  • C. William Hanke

摘要

Placenta-derived skin substitutes are marketed for post-Mohs wounds, but financial impact is uncertain. To estimate practice acquisition costs and modeled Medicare product reimbursement for placenta-derived products versus second-intention (SI) healing in two post-Mohs defects. In 2025, vendors provided pricing and coding inputs. We modeled (A) a 4 × 4 cm forehead defect to temporalis fascia (16 cm2) treated weekly for 4 applications and (B) a 4 × 3.5 cm medial foot defect to deep subcutaneous fat (14 cm2) treated weekly for 6 applications, using the smallest sheet with ≤ 10% waste. SI was modeled as supply-only clinic costs during the postoperative global period. For a 16 cm2 defect, per-application acquisition ranged from $1,495 (MiMedx EpiFix 4 × 4.5 cm) to $35,031 (Samaritan Biologics Complete AA); modeled Medicare product reimbursement ranged from $1,668 to $43,115 per application. Cumulative acquisition was $5,980–$140,125 (forehead) and $8,970–$210,187 (foot) versus SI $120–$320 and $180–$480. Inputs were company-reported; regional/contract variability was not assessed; closure times were modeled; SI excluded patient-reported outcomes and opportunity costs. Even moderate post-Mohs defects can generate large cumulative expenditures with placental substitutes. Pre-use cost modeling, accurate coding, waste minimization, and documentation of medical necessity should precede routine use.