Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Med Econ. 2013;16(4):566-74. doi: 10.3111/13696998.2013.770747. Epub 2013 Feb 6.

Cost effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared to medical management in inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis: Canadian analysis based on the PARTNER Trial Cohort B findings.

Author information

1
OptumInsight, Burlington, Ontario, Canada. rebeccalhancock@hotmail.com

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

The only effective treatment for severe aortic stenosis (AS) is valve replacement. However, many patients with co-existing conditions are ineligible for surgical valve replacement, historically leaving medical management (MM) as the only option which has a poor prognosis. Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) is a less invasive replacement method. The objective was to estimate cost-effectiveness of TAVR via transfemoral access vs MM in surgically inoperable patients with severe AS from the Canadian public healthcare system perspective.

METHODS:

A cost-effectiveness analysis of TAVR vs MM was conducted using a deterministic decision analytic model over a 3-year time horizon. The PARTNER randomized controlled trial results were used to estimate survival, utilities, and some resource utilization. Costs included the valve replacement procedure, complications, hospitalization, outpatient visits/tests, and home/nursing care. Resources were valued (2009 Canadian dollars) using costs from the Ontario Case Costing Initiative (OCCI), Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care and Ontario Drug Benefits Formulary, or were estimated using relative costs from a French economic evaluation or clinical experts. Costs and outcomes were discounted 5% annually. The effect of uncertainty in model parameters was explored in deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS:

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $32,170 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained for TAVR vs MM. When the time horizon was shortened to 24 and 12 months, the ICER increased to $52,848 and $157,429, respectively. All other sensitivity analysis returned an ICER of less than $50,000/QALY gained.

LIMITATIONS:

A limitation was lack of availability of Canadian-specific resource and cost data for all resources, leaving one to rely on clinical experts and data from France to inform certain parameters.

CONCLUSIONS:

Based on the results of this analysis, it can be concluded that TAVR is cost-effective compared to MM for the treatment of severe AS in surgically inoperable patients.

PMID:
23356420
DOI:
10.3111/13696998.2013.770747
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Taylor & Francis
Loading ...
Support Center