Advertisement

May 6, 2014

Study: TEVAR More Cost-Effective Than Open Repair of Acute Complicated Type B Aortic Dissections

May 7, 2014—Thomas Luebke, MD, and Jan Brunkwall, MD, published findings from a study of the cost-effectiveness of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) versus open repair (OR) of acute complicated type B aortic dissections (TBAD) in the Journal of Vascular Surgery (2014;59:1247–1255). This study weighed the costs and benefits of the two approaches and estimated cost-effectiveness to determine an optimal treatment strategy based on the best currently available evidence.

As detailed in the Journal of Vascular Surgery, the investigators performed a cost-utility analysis from the perspective of the health system payer using a decision-analytic model. Within this model, the 1-year survival, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and costs for a hypothetical cohort of patients with acute complicated TBAD managed with TEVAR or OR were evaluated. 

Clinical effectiveness data, cost data, and transitional probabilities of different health states were derived from previously published high-quality studies or meta-analyses. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed on uncertain model parameters.

The investigators performed a cost-utility analysis from the perspective that the base-case analysis showed, in terms of QALYs, that OR appeared to be more expensive (incremental cost of €17,252.60) and less effective (-0.19 QALYs) compared with TEVAR; hence, in terms of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, TEVAR prevailed over OR. 

As a result, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ie, the cost per life-year saved) was not calculated. The average cost-effectiveness ratio of TEVAR and OR per QALY gained was €56,316.79 and €108,421.91, respectively. 

In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, TEVAR was economically dominant in 100% of cases. The probability that TEVAR was economically attractive at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €50,000/QALY gained was 100%.

The investigators stated that these results suggest that TEVAR yielded more QALYs and was associated with lower 1-year costs compared with OR in patients with an acute complicated TBAD. As a result, from the cost-effectiveness point of view, TEVAR is the dominant therapy over OR for this disease under the predefined conditions, concluded the investigators in the Journal of Vascular Surgery.

Advertisement


May 7, 2014

FDA Updates Safety Communication on IVC Filter Retrieval

May 7, 2014

FDA Updates Safety Communication on IVC Filter Retrieval