Cost‐effectiveness of screening and valacyclovir‐based treatment strategies for first‐trimester cytomegalovirus primary infection in pregnant women in France.

Objective: To assess the effectiveness, cost and cost‐effectiveness of four screening strategies for first‐trimester (T1) cytomegalovirus (CMV) primary infection (PI) in pregnant women in France. Methods: In a simulated pregnant population of 800 000 (approximate number of pregnancies each year in France), using costs based on the year 2022, we compared four CMV maternal screening strategies: Strategy S1, no systematic screening (current public health recommendations in France); Strategy S2, screening of 25–50% of the pregnant population (current screening practice in France); Strategy S3, universal screening (current medical recommendations in France); Strategy S4, universal screening (as in Strategy S3) in conjunction with valacyclovir in case of T1 PI. Outcomes were total cost, effectiveness (number of congenital infections, number of diagnosed infections) and incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER). Two ICERs were calculated, comparing Strategies S1, S2 and S3 in terms of euros (€) per additional diagnosis, and comparing Strategies S1 and S4 in € per avoided congenital infection. Results: Compared with Strategy S1, Strategy S3 enabled diagnosis of 536 more infected fetuses and Strategy S4 prevented 375 congenital infections. Strategy S1 was the least expensive strategy (€98.3m total lifetime cost), followed by Strategy S4 (€98.6m), Strategy S2 (€106.0m) and Strategy S3 (€118.9m). In the first analysis, Strategy S2 was dominated and Strategy S3 led to an additional €38 552 per additional in‐utero diagnosis, compared with Strategy S1. In the second analysis, Strategy S4 led to an additional €893 per avoided congenital infection compared with Strategy S1, and was cost‐saving compared with Strategy S2. Conclusions: In France, current screening practice for CMV PI during pregnancy is no longer acceptable in terms of cost‐effectiveness because this strategy was dominated by universal screening. Moreover, universal screening in conjunction with valacyclovir treatment would be cost‐effective compared with current recommendations and is cost‐saving compared with current practice. © 2023 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)