Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of radiofrequency catheter ablation compared with antiarrhythmic drug therapy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

ABSTRACT: Radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFA) has emerged as an important treatment strategy for atrial fibrillation (AF). The potential cost-effectiveness of RFA for AF, relative to antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy, has not been fully explored from a US perspective.We constructed a Markov disease simulation model for a hypothetical cohort of patients with drug-refractory paroxysmal AF, treated either with RFA with/without AAD or AAD alone. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years were projected over 5 years. Model inputs were drawn from published clinical trial and registry data, from new registry and trial data analysis, and from data prospectively collected from patients with AF treated with RFA at our institution. We assumed no benefit from ablation on stroke, heart failure or death, but did estimate changes in quality-adjusted life expectancy using data from several AF cohorts. In the base case scenario, cumulative costs with the RFA and AAD strategies were $26,584 and $19,898, respectively. Over 5 years, quality-adjusted life expectancy was 3.51 quality-adjusted life-years with RFA versus 3.38 for the AAD group. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for RFA versus AAD was thus $51,431 per quality-adjusted life-year. Model results were most sensitive to time horizon, the relative utility weights of successful ablation versus unsuccessful drug therapy, and to the cost of an ablation procedure.RFA with/without AAD for symptomatic, drug-refractory paroxysmal AF appears to be reasonably cost-effective compared with AAD therapy alone from the perspective of the US health care system, based on improved quality of life and avoidance of future health care costs.

SUBMITTER: Reynolds MR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2760061 | biostudies-literature | 2009 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of radiofrequency catheter ablation compared with antiarrhythmic drug therapy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

Reynolds Matthew R MR Zimetbaum Peter P Josephson Mark E ME Ellis Ethan E Danilov Tatyana T Cohen David J DJ

Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology 20090417 4

<h4>Background</h4>Radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFA) has emerged as an important treatment strategy for atrial fibrillation (AF). The potential cost-effectiveness of RFA for AF, relative to antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy, has not been fully explored from a US perspective.<h4>Methods and results</h4>We constructed a Markov disease simulation model for a hypothetical cohort of patients with drug-refractory paroxysmal AF, treated either with RFA with/without AAD or AAD alone. Costs and qual ...[more]

PMID: 19808491

Similar Datasets

Project description:Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most prevalent cardiac arrhythmia (Calkins H, et al. 2012). There are various methods to treat AF of which Ablation is one of the most effective. We aimed to assess the cost-utility of Cryoballoon ablation (CBA) compared to Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) to treat patients with paroxysmal AF in Iran. A cost-utility analysis was done using a decision-analytic model based on a lifetime Markov structure which was drawn considering the nature of interventions and the natural progress of the disease. Costs data were extracted from medical records of 47 patients of Shahid Rajaie Cardiovascular Medical Center in Tehran in 2019. Parameters and variables such as transition probabilities, risks related to side effects, mortality rates, and utility values were extracted from the available evidence. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was also done. TreeAge pro-2020 software was used in all stages of analysis. In the base case analysis, the CBA strategy was associated with higher cost and effectiveness than RFA, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $11,223 per Quality-adjusted life year (QALY), which compared to Iran's GDP per capita as Willingness to pay threshold, CBA was not cost-effective. On the other hand, considering twice the GDP per capita as a threshold, CBA was cost-effective. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the findings of base case analysis, showed that RFA was cost-effective and the probability of cost-effectiveness was 59%. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the results of the study have the highest sensitivity to changes in the RFA cost variable. Results of sensitivity analysis showed that the cost-effectiveness results were not robust and are sensitive to changes in variables changes. Primary results showed that CBA compared to RFA is not cost-effective in the treatment of AF considering one GDP per capita. But the sensitivity analysis results showed considerable sensitivity to changes of the ablation costs variable.

Project description:AimsThe current challenge in atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment is to develop effective, efficient, and safe ablation strategies. This randomized controlled trial assesses the medium-term efficacy of duty-cycled radiofrequency ablation via the circular pulmonary vein ablation catheter (PVAC) vs. conventional electro-anatomically guided wide-area circumferential ablation (WACA).Methods and resultsOne hundred and eighty-eight patients (mean age 62 ± 12 years, 116 M : 72 F) with paroxysmal AF were prospectively randomized to PVAC or WACA strategies and sequentially followed for 12 months. The primary endpoint was freedom from symptomatic or documented >30 s AF off medications for 7 days at 12 months post-procedure. One hundred and eighty-three patients completed 12 m follow-up. Ninety-four patients underwent PVAC PV isolation with 372 of 376 pulmonary veins (PVs) successfully isolated and all PVs isolated in 92 WACA patients. Three WACA and no PVAC patients developed tamponade. Fifty-six percent of WACA and 60% of PVAC patients were free of AF at 12 months post-procedure (P = ns) with a significant attrition rate from 77 to 78%, respectively, at 6 months. The mean procedure (140 ± 43 vs. 167 ± 42 min, P<0.0001), fluoroscopy (35 ± 16 vs. 42 ± 20 min, P<0.05) times were significantly shorter for PVAC than for WACA. Two patients developed strokes within 72 h of the procedure in the PVAC group, one possibly related directly to PVAC ablation in a high-risk patient and none in the WACA group (P = ns). Two of the 47 patients in the PVAC group who underwent repeat ablation had sub-clinical mild PV stenoses of 25-50% and 1 WACA patient developed delayed severe PV stenosis requiring venoplasty.ConclusionThe pulmonary vein ablation catheter is equivalent in efficacy to WACA with reduced procedural and fluoroscopy times. However, there is a risk of thrombo-embolic and pulmonary stenosis complications which needs to be addressed and prospectively monitored.Clinicaltrialsgov identifierNCT00678340.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Assessing the cost-effectiveness credentials of this intervention in patients with concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) compared with usual medical therapy. DESIGN:A Markov model comprising two health states (ie, alive or dead) was constructed. The transition probabilities were directly derived from published Kaplan-Meier curves of the pivotal randomised controlled trial and extrapolated over the cohort's lifetime using recommended methods. Costs of catheter ablation, outpatient consultations, hospitalisation, medications and examinations were included. Resource use and unit costs were sourced from government websites or published literature. A lifetime horizon and a healthcare system perspective were taken. All costs and benefits were discounted at 3% annually. Deterministic (DSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were run around the key model parameters to test the robustness of the base case results. PARTICIPANTS:A hypothetical Australian cohort of patients with concomitant AF and HF who are resistant to antiarrhythmic treatment. INTERVENTIONS:Catheter ablation versus medical therapy. RESULTS:The catheter ablation was associated with a cost of $A44 377 per person, in comparison to $A28 506 for the medical therapy alone over a lifetime. Catheter ablation contributed to 4.58 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and 6.99 LY gains compared with 4.30 QALYs and 6.53 LY gains, respectively, in the medical therapy arm. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $A55 942/QALY or $A35 020/LY. The DSA showed that results were highly sensitive to costs of ablation and time horizon. The PSA yielded very consistent results with the base case. CONCLUSIONS:Offering catheter ablation procedure to patients with systematic paroxysmal or persistent AF who failed to respond to antiarrhythmic drugs was associated with higher costs, greater benefits. When compared with medical therapy alone, this intervention is not cost-effective from an Australia healthcare system perspective.

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of radiofrequency catheter ablation compared with antiarrhythmic drug therapy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of radiofrequency catheter ablation compared with antiarrhythmic drug therapy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets