Florida Hospital Cardiovascular Institute, Orlando, FL, USA.
Johnson & Johnson Medical Devices, Franchise Health Economics & Market Access, Irvine, CA, USA.
J Comp Eff Res. 2019 Mar;8(4):251-264. doi: 10.2217/cer-2018-0112. Epub 2018 Dec 21.
To compare health utilization among atrial fibrillation (AF) patients undergoing ablation with a contact force-sensing (CF) catheter versus a cryoballoon (CB) catheter.
AF patients who underwent ablation using the CF catheter (THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH catheter) or CB catheter (Arctic Front™/Arctic Front Advance™ catheter) were identified from the Premier Healthcare database. Propensity score analyses were used to evaluate cost, length of stay and readmissions.
The CF catheter (n = 1409) was associated with significantly lower total (∼7%) and supply (∼13%) costs and a significantly lower likelihood of 4-12 month all-cause and CV-related readmission compared with the CB catheter (n = 2306).
Differential health utilization outcomes are associated with the CF catheter versus the CB catheter in AF ablation.
比较使用接触力感应（CF）导管与冷冻球囊（CB）导管进行消融术的心房颤动（AF）患者的健康利用情况。
从 Premier Healthcare 数据库中确定使用 CF 导管（THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH 导管）或 CB 导管（Arctic Front™/Arctic Front Advance™ 导管）进行消融术的 AF 患者。采用倾向评分分析评估成本、住院时间和再入院情况。
与 CB 导管（n=2306）相比，CF 导管（n=1409）的总（约 7%）和供应（约 13%）成本显著降低，4-12 个月全因和心血管相关再入院的可能性显著降低。
在 AF 消融中，CF 导管与 CB 导管的健康利用结果存在差异。
Zotero 插件