Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri; University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Medicine, Kansas City, Missouri.
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Nov 28;9(22):2343-2352. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.08.036.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty versus standard percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA).
Recent trials have reported lower rates of target lesion revascularization with DCB angioplasty versus standard PTA. However, the cost-effectiveness of DCB angioplasty is unknown.
A prospective economic study was performed alongside the IN.PACT SFA II (IN.PACT Admiral Drug-Coated Balloon vs. Standard Balloon Angioplasty for the Treatment of Superficial Femoral Artery [SFA] and Proximal Popliteal Artery [PPA]) trial, which randomized 181 patients with femoropopliteal disease to the IN.PACT DCB versus standard PTA. Resource use data were collected over 2-year follow-up, and costs were assigned using resource-based accounting and billing data. Health utilities were assessed using the EuroQol 5-dimensions questionnaire. Cost-effectiveness was assessed as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained using a decision-analytic model on the basis of empirical data from the trial assuming identical long-term mortality.
Initial costs were $1,129 per patient higher with DCB angioplasty than standard PTA, driven by higher costs for the DCB itself. Between discharge and 24 months, target limb-related costs were $1,212 per patient lower with DCB angioplasty such that discounted 2-year costs were similar for the 2 groups ($11,277 vs. $11,359, p = 0.97), whereas QALYs tended to be greater among patients treated with DCBs (1.53 ± 0.44 vs. 1.47 ± 0.42, p = 0.40). The probability that DCB angioplasty is cost-effective compared with standard PTA was 70% using a threshold of $50,000 per QALY gained and 79% at a threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained.
For patients with femoropopliteal disease, DCB angioplasty is associated with better 2-year outcomes and similar target limb-related costs compared with standard PTA. Formal cost-effectiveness analysis on the basis of these results suggests that use of the DCB angioplasty is likely to be economically attractive.
本研究旨在评估药物涂层球囊(DCB)血管成形术与标准经皮腔内血管成形术(PTA)的成本效益。
最近的试验报告称,与标准 PTA 相比,DCB 血管成形术的靶病变血运重建率较低。然而,DCB 血管成形术的成本效益尚不清楚。
在 IN.PACT SFA II(IN.PACT Admiral 药物涂层球囊与标准球囊血管成形术治疗股浅动脉[SFA]和腘动脉近端[PPA])试验中进行了前瞻性经济研究,该试验将 181 例股腘疾病患者随机分为 IN.PACT DCB 组和标准 PTA 组。在 2 年的随访期间收集了资源使用数据,并使用基于资源的核算和计费数据分配了成本。使用 EuroQol 5 维度问卷评估健康效用。基于试验的经验数据,使用决策分析模型评估成本效益,假设长期死亡率相同,成本效益为每获得一个质量调整生命年(QALY)的成本。
与标准 PTA 相比,DCB 血管成形术的初始成本每例患者高 1129 美元,这主要是由于 DCB 本身的成本较高。在出院至 24 个月期间,DCB 血管成形术的靶肢体相关成本每例患者低 1212 美元,因此两组的 2 年折扣成本相似(11277 美元与 11359 美元,p=0.97),而 QALYs 则倾向于 DCB 治疗患者更高(1.53±0.44 与 1.47±0.42,p=0.40)。使用每获得一个 QALY 成本为 50000 美元的阈值,与标准 PTA 相比,DCB 血管成形术的成本效益概率为 70%;使用每获得一个 QALY 成本为 150000 美元的阈值,这一概率为 79%。
对于股腘疾病患者,与标准 PTA 相比,DCB 血管成形术与更好的 2 年结果相关,且靶肢体相关成本相似。基于这些结果的正式成本效益分析表明,使用 DCB 血管成形术具有经济吸引力。