Format

Send to

Choose Destination
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2016 Aug 31;16(1):167. doi: 10.1186/s12872-016-0351-y.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of left atrial appendage occlusion compared with pharmacological strategies for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation.

Author information

1
School of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 8th Floor, Lo Kwee-Seong Integrated Biomedical Sciences Building, Area 39, Shatin, Hong Kong. vivianlee@cuhk.edu.hk.
2
School of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 8th Floor, Lo Kwee-Seong Integrated Biomedical Sciences Building, Area 39, Shatin, Hong Kong.
3
Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, Hong Kong.
4
Department of Cardiology, Erciyes University School of Medicine, Kayseri, Turkey.
5
Charité University Medicine Berlin, Klinikum Coburg, Coburg, Germany.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is a promising therapy for stroke prophylaxis in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) but its cost-effectiveness remains understudied. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of LAAO for stroke prophylaxis in NVAF.

METHODS:

A Markov decision analytic model was used to compare the cost-effectiveness of LAAO with 7 pharmacological strategies: aspirin alone, clopidogrel plus aspirin, warfarin, dabigatran 110 mg, dabigatran 150 mg, apixaban, and rivaroxaban. Outcome measures included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), lifetime costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Base-case data were derived from ACTIVE, RE-LY, ARISTOTLE, ROCKET-AF, PROTECT-AF and PREVAIL trials. One-way sensitivity analysis varied by CHADS2 score, HAS-BLED score, time horizons, and LAAO costs; and probabilistic sensitivity analysis using 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations was conducted to assess parameter uncertainty.

RESULTS:

LAAO was considered cost-effective compared with aspirin, clopidogrel plus aspirin, and warfarin, with ICER of US$5,115, $2,447, and $6,298 per QALY gained, respectively. LAAO was dominant (i.e. less costly but more effective) compared to other strategies. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated favorable ICERs of LAAO against other strategies in varied CHADS2 score, HAS-BLED score, time horizons (5 to 15 years) and LAAO costs. LAAO was cost-effective in 86.24 % of 10,000 simulations using a threshold of US$50,000/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS:

Transcatheter LAAO is cost-effective for prevention of stroke in NVAF compared with 7 pharmacological strategies. The transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is considered cost-effective against the standard 7 oral pharmacological strategies including acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) alone, clopidogrel plus ASA, warfarin, dabigatran 110 mg, dabigatran 150 mg, apixaban, and rivaroxaban for stroke prophylaxis in non-valvular atrial fibrillation management.

KEYWORDS:

Atrial fibrillation; Cost-effectiveness; Left atrial appendage occlusion; Stroke prevention

PMID:
27581874
PMCID:
PMC5007846
DOI:
10.1186/s12872-016-0351-y
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for BioMed Central Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center