Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
J Neurointerv Surg. 2019 Dec;11(12):1210-1215. doi: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2019-014747. Epub 2019 Jun 25.
Endovascular treatment of basilar tip aneurysms is less invasive than microsurgical clipping, but requires closer follow-up.
To characterize the additional costs associated with endovascular treatment of basilar tip aneurysms rather than microsurgical clipping.
We obtained clinical records and billing information for 141 basilar tip aneurysms treated with clip ligation (n=48) or endovascular embolization (n=93). Costs included direct and indirect costs associated with index hospitalization, as well as re-treatments, follow-up visits, imaging studies, rehabilitation, and disability. Effectiveness of treatment was quantified by converting functional outcomes (modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score) into quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Cost-effectiveness was performed using cost/QALY ratios.
Average index hospitalization costs were significantly higher for patients with unruptured aneurysms treated with clip ligation ($71 400 ± $47 100) compared with coil embolization ($33 500 ± $22 600), balloon-assisted coiling ($26 200 ± $11 600), and stent-assisted coiling ($38 500 ± $20 900). Multivariate predictors for higher index hospitalization cost included vasospasm requiring endovascular intervention, placement of a ventriculoperitoneal shunt, longer length of stay, larger aneurysm neck and width, higher Hunt-Hess grade, and treatment-associated complications. At 1 year, endovascular treatment was associated with lower cost/QALY than clip ligation in unruptured aneurysms ($52 000/QALY vs $137 000/QALY, respectively, p=0.006), but comparable rates in ruptured aneurysms ($193 000/QALY vs $233 000/QALY, p=0.277). Multivariate predictors for higher cost/QALY included worse mRS score at discharge, procedural complications, and larger aneurysm width.
Coil embolization of basilar tip aneurysms is associated with a lower cost/QALY. This effect is sustained during follow-up. Clinical condition at discharge is the most significant predictor of overall cost/QALY at 1 year.
与显微夹闭相比,血管内治疗基底尖动脉瘤的侵袭性更小,但需要更密切的随访。
描述血管内治疗基底尖动脉瘤的额外费用,而不是显微夹闭。
我们获得了 141 例基底尖动脉瘤患者的临床记录和计费信息,其中夹闭结扎(n=48)或血管内栓塞(n=93)。费用包括索引住院期间的直接和间接费用,以及再治疗、随访、影像学研究、康复和残疾。通过将功能结果(改良Rankin 量表(mRS)评分)转换为质量调整生命年(QALY)来量化治疗效果。使用成本/QALY 比值进行成本效益分析。
未破裂动脉瘤患者接受夹闭治疗的平均指数住院费用明显高于血管内栓塞治疗(71400 美元±47100 美元)、球囊辅助线圈栓塞治疗(26200 美元±11600 美元)和支架辅助线圈栓塞治疗(38500 美元±20900 美元)。指数住院费用较高的多变量预测因素包括需要血管内介入治疗的血管痉挛、放置脑室-腹腔分流管、住院时间延长、更大的瘤颈和宽度、更高的 Hunt-Hess 分级以及与治疗相关的并发症。在 1 年时,血管内治疗在未破裂动脉瘤中与夹闭治疗相比,成本/QALY 较低(分别为 52000 美元/QALY 和 137000 美元/QALY,p=0.006),但在破裂动脉瘤中,成本/QALY 相似(分别为 193000 美元/QALY 和 233000 美元/QALY,p=0.277)。成本/QALY 较高的多变量预测因素包括出院时 mRS 评分较差、手术并发症和更大的动脉瘤宽度。
血管内栓塞治疗基底尖动脉瘤与较低的成本/QALY 相关。这种效果在随访期间持续存在。出院时的临床状况是 1 年时总成本/QALY 的最重要预测因素。