Is Endovascular Therapy for Stroke Cost-Effective Globally? A Systematic Review of the Literature.

OBJECTIVES

Cost-effectiveness of endovascular therapy (EVT) is a key consideration for broad use of this approach for emergent large vessel occlusion stroke. We evaluated the evidence on cost-effectiveness of EVT in comparison with best medical management from a global perspective.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This systematic review of studies published between January 2010 and May 2020 evaluated the cost effectiveness of EVT for patients with large vessel occlusion acute ischemic stroke. The gain in quality adjusted life year (QALY) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as cost per QALY resulting from EVT, were recorded. The study setting (country, economic perspective), decision model, and data sources used in economic models of EVT cost-effectiveness were recorded.

RESULTS

Twenty-five original studies from 12 different countries were included in our review. Five of these studies were reported from a societal perspective; 18 were reported from a healthcare system perspective. Two studies used real-world data. The time horizon varied from 1 year to a lifetime; however, 18 studies reported a time horizon of >10 years. Twenty studies reported using outcome data from randomized, controlled clinical trials for their models. Nineteen studies reported using a Markov model. Incremental QALYs ranged from 0.09-3.5. All studies but 1 reported that EVT was cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from different countries and economic perspectives suggests that EVT for stroke treatment is cost-effective. Most cost-effectiveness studies are based on outcome data from randomized clinical trials. However, there is a need to study the cost-effectiveness of EVT based solely on real-world outcome data.