ObjectivePoor glycemic control is a risk factor for surgical complications. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of immediate versus delayed pelvic reconstructive surgery for women with hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c) greater than 8%.MethodsWe designed a decision tree model from a health care sector perspective to compare costs and effectiveness (quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]) of 3 strategies: patients with HbA1c greater than 8% can undergo (1) immediate surgery, (2) delay surgery 6 months, or (3) delay surgery until HbA1c is less than 8%. Groups 2 and 3 undergo treatments to improve glycemic control. Our primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Time horizon was 1 year.ResultsIn the base case, immediate surgery compared with delaying surgery until HbA1c <8% had higher costs ($13,775 vs $6,622) and health utilities (0.78 vs 0.76). Immediate surgery was not cost effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $347,132/QALY). Delaying surgery for 6 months (group 2) was dominated (higher cost and lower effectiveness). For patients with either severe prolapse resulting in QALY less than 0.71 (base case 0.75), QALY after surgery greater than 0.84 (base case, 0.80), or the probability of complications with elevated HbA1c less than 17% (base case, 27%), immediate surgery became cost effective. Monte Carlo simulations showed that delaying surgery until HbA1c is less than 8% had a 58% chance of being the preferred strategy at a willingness-to-pay of $150,000/QALY.ConclusionsFor patients with HbA1c greater than 8%, delaying surgery until improved glycemic control is generally cost-effective. Surgery should not be delayed for a prespecified period. Immediate surgery can be cost-effective for patients with severe prolapse or if complication rates decrease to 60% of currently reported rates.