Division of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Surgery, Schulich Heart Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Schulich Heart Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Can J Cardiol. 2021 Jul;37(7):992-1003. doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2020.11.015. Epub 2021 May 1.
Herein, we describe the unique interplay among biomedical ethics, principles of distributive justice, and economic theory to highlight the role of health technology assessments to compare therapeutic options for aortic valve replacement. From the perspective of the Canadian health care system, transcatheter aortic-valve implantation is associated with higher costs but also higher incremental health benefits compared with surgical aortic-valve replacement. At current willingness to pay thresholds, transcatheter aortic-valve replacement is likely cost effective across the spectrum of risk, from inoperable patients to those at low surgical risk. However, we highlight the nuances within each subgroup of surgical risk that merit careful consideration by the heart team. Moreover, incorporation of patients and their preferences in decision-making is key. In particular, in young, low-risk patients, there remains uncertainty regarding the optimal treatment, with unique concerns around valve durability, selection of valve prosthesis, and consideration for special procedures such as the Ross procedure. Nonetheless, current research suggests that, universally, patients prefer a less invasive approach compared with a more invasive approach. Finally, we highlight that there remain critical issues around timeliness of access to care and unacceptable geographic inequities across Canada. Further research into alternative funding mechanisms and integrated cross-sector care pathways is necessary to address these issues.
在此,我们描述了生物医学伦理、分配正义原则和经济理论之间的独特相互作用,以强调卫生技术评估在比较主动脉瓣置换治疗选择方面的作用。从加拿大医疗保健系统的角度来看,与外科主动脉瓣置换相比,经导管主动脉瓣植入术的成本更高,但也能带来更高的增量健康收益。在当前的支付意愿阈值下,经导管主动脉瓣置换术在从无法手术的患者到低手术风险的患者的风险谱中可能具有成本效益。然而,我们强调了手术风险每个亚组内值得心脏团队仔细考虑的细微差别。此外,将患者及其偏好纳入决策制定是关键。特别是在年轻、低风险的患者中,对于最佳治疗方法仍存在不确定性,存在与瓣膜耐久性、瓣膜假体选择以及考虑特殊手术(如罗斯手术)相关的独特问题。尽管如此,目前的研究表明,普遍而言,患者更喜欢微创方法而不是更具侵入性的方法。最后,我们强调,在加拿大,仍存在获得护理的及时性和不可接受的地理不平等方面的关键问题。需要进一步研究替代供资机制和综合跨部门护理途径,以解决这些问题。