In-hospital cost-effectiveness analysis of open versus staged fenestrated/branched endovascular elective repair of thoracoabdominal aneurysms.
Humans
Blood Vessel Prosthesis
/ adverse effects
Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation
Stents
/ adverse effects
Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic
/ diagnostic imaging
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
Endovascular Procedures
Treatment Outcome
Postoperative Complications
Aneurysm
/ surgery
Risk Factors
Hospitals
Retrospective Studies
Cost-effectiveness analysis
Endovascular procedures
Fenestrated/branched
Open surgery
Propensity score
Thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm
Journal
Journal of vascular surgery
ISSN: 1097-6809
Titre abrégé: J Vasc Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8407742
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 2023
08 2023
Historique:
received:
23
01
2023
revised:
07
03
2023
accepted:
09
03
2023
medline:
24
7
2023
pubmed:
20
4
2023
entrez:
19
04
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To compare costs and effectiveness of elective open (OR) vs fenestrated/branched endovascular (ER) repair of thoracoabdominal aneurysms (TAAAs) in a high-volume center. This single-center retrospective observational study (PRO-ENDO TAAA Study, NCT05266781) was designed as part of a larger health technology assessment analysis. All electively treated TAAAs between 2013 and 2021 were analyzed and propensity-matched. End points were clinical success, major adverse events (MAEs), hospital direct costs, and freedom from all causes and aneurysm-related mortality and reinterventions. Risk factors and outcomes were homogeneously classified according to the Society of Vascular Surgery reporting standards. Cost-effectiveness value and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were calculated, considering the absence of MAEs as a measure of effectiveness. Propensity matching identified 102 pairs of patients out of 789 TAAAs. Mortality, MAE, permanent spinal cord ischemia rates, respiratory complications, cardiac complications, and renal injury were higher for OR (13% vs 5%, P = .048; 60% vs 17%, P < .001; 10% vs 3%, P = .045; 91% vs 18%, P < .001; 16% vs 6%, P = .024; 27% vs 6%, P < .001, respectively). Access complication rate (6% vs 27%; P < .001) was higher in the ER group. Intensive care unit stay was longer (P < .001) for OR, and ER patients were discharged home more frequently (3% vs 94%; P < .001). No differences in midterm end points were observed at 2 years. Despite ER reducing all the hospital cost items (-42% to -88%, P < .001), the higher expenses (P < .001) of the endovascular devices increased the overall cost of ER by 80%. Cost-effectiveness value for ER was favorable to OR (56,365 vs 64,903 €/patient) with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 48,409 € per MAE saved. ER of TAAA reduces perioperative mortality and morbidity compared with OR, with no differences in reinterventions and survival rates at midterm follow-up. Despite the expenses for endovascular grafts, ER was found to be more cost-effective in preventing MAEs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37076108
pii: S0741-5214(23)01034-0
doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2023.03.503
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Observational Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
300-312.e3Investigateurs
Eleonora Bossi
(E)
Silvia Colucci
(S)
Dario La Fauci
(D)
Simone Salvati
(S)
Carlo Signorelli
(C)
Giacomo Pietro Vigezzi
(GP)
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.