Gottschalk Sophie, König Hans-Helmut, Subtil Fabien, Bonekamp Susanne, Denis Angelique, Aamodt Anne Hege, Fuentes Blanca, Gizewski Elke R, Hill Michael D, Krajina Antonin, Pierot Laurent, Simonsen Claus Ziegler, Zeleňák Kamil, Bendszus Martin, Thomalla Götz, Dams Judith
Department of Health Economics and Health Services Research, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
Hamburg Center for Health Economics, Hamburg, Germany.
J Neurointerv Surg. 2025 Jun 16;17(7):683-690. doi: 10.1136/jnis-2024-021837.
Recent studies, including the TENSION trial, support the use of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in acute ischemic stroke with large infarct (Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score (ASPECTS) 3-5).
To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of EVT compared with best medical care (BMC) alone in this population from a German healthcare payer perspective.
A short-term decision tree and a long-term Markov model (lifetime horizon) were used to compare healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) between EVT and BMC. The effectiveness of EVT was reflected by the 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) outcome from the TENSION trial. QALYs were based on published mRS-specific health utilities (EQ-5D-3L indices). Long-term healthcare costs were calculated based on insurance data. Costs (reported in 2022 euros) and QALYs were discounted by 3% annually. Cost-effectiveness was assessed using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to account for parameter uncertainties.
Compared with BMC, EVT yielded higher lifetime incremental costs (€24 257) and effects (1.41 QALYs), resulting in an ICER of €17 158/QALY. The results were robust to parameter variation in sensitivity analyses (eg, 95% probability of cost-effectiveness was achieved at a willingness to pay of >€22 000/QALY). Subgroup analyses indicated that EVT was cost-effective for all ASPECTS subgroups.
EVT for acute ischemic stroke with established large infarct is likely to be cost-effective compared with BMC, assuming that an additional investment of €17 158/QALY is deemed acceptable by the healthcare payer.
包括TENSION试验在内的近期研究支持在大面积梗死(阿尔伯塔卒中项目早期计算机断层扫描评分(ASPECTS)为3 - 5分)的急性缺血性卒中中使用血管内血栓切除术(EVT)。
从德国医疗保健支付方的角度评估EVT与单纯最佳药物治疗(BMC)相比在该人群中的成本效益。
使用短期决策树和长期马尔可夫模型(终身范围)来比较EVT和BMC之间的医疗保健成本和质量调整生命年(QALY)。EVT的有效性通过TENSION试验的90天改良Rankin量表(mRS)结果来反映。QALY基于已发表的特定mRS健康效用(EQ - 5D - 3L指数)。长期医疗保健成本根据保险数据计算。成本(以2022年欧元报告)和QALY每年按3%进行贴现。使用增量成本效益比(ICER)评估成本效益。进行确定性和概率敏感性分析以考虑参数不确定性。
与BMC相比,EVT产生了更高的终身增量成本(24257欧元)和效果(1.41个QALY),导致ICER为17158欧元/QALY。结果在敏感性分析中的参数变化方面具有稳健性(例如,在支付意愿>22000欧元/QALY时,成本效益的概率为95%)。亚组分析表明,EVT对所有ASPECTS亚组都具有成本效益。
假设医疗保健支付方认为每QALY额外投资17158欧元是可接受的,那么对于已确定大面积梗死的急性缺血性卒中,与BMC相比,EVT可能具有成本效益。