Cost-utility analysis of TAVI compared with surgery in patients with severe aortic stenosis at low risk of surgical mortality in the Netherlands.
Aortic valve stenosis
Cost-utility analysis
Heart
Risk
Surgery
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement
Journal
Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E
ISSN: 1478-7547
Titre abrégé: Cost Eff Resour Alloc
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101170476
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 Mar 2024
26 Mar 2024
Historique:
received:
26
10
2023
accepted:
19
03
2024
medline:
26
3
2024
pubmed:
26
3
2024
entrez:
26
3
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
There is growing evidence to support the benefits of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (sSAS) who are at high- or intermediate-risk of surgical mortality. The PARTNER 3 trial showed clinical benefits with SAPIEN 3 TAVI compared with SAVR in patients at low risk of surgical mortality. Whether TAVI is also cost-effective compared with SAVR for low-risk patients in the Dutch healthcare system remains uncertain. This article presents an analysis using PARTNER 3 outcomes and costs data from the Netherlands to inform a cost-utility model and examine cost implications of TAVI over SAVR in a Dutch low-risk population. A two-stage cost-utility analysis was performed using a published and validated health economic model based on adverse events with both TAVI and SAVR interventions from a published randomized low risk trial dataset, and a Markov model that captured lifetime healthcare costs and patient outcomes post-intervention. The model was adapted using Netherlands-specific cost data to assess the cost-effectiveness of TAVI and SAVR. Uncertainty was addressed using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. TAVI generated 0.89 additional quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at a €4742 increase in costs per patient compared with SAVR over a lifetime time horizon, representing an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €5346 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses confirm robust results, with TAVI remaining cost-effective across several sensitivity analyses. Based on the model results, compared with SAVR, TAVI with SAPIEN 3 appears cost-effective for the treatment of Dutch patients with sSAS who are at low risk of surgical mortality. Qualitative data suggest broader societal benefits are likely and these findings could be used to optimize appropriate intervention selection for this patient population.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
There is growing evidence to support the benefits of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (sSAS) who are at high- or intermediate-risk of surgical mortality. The PARTNER 3 trial showed clinical benefits with SAPIEN 3 TAVI compared with SAVR in patients at low risk of surgical mortality. Whether TAVI is also cost-effective compared with SAVR for low-risk patients in the Dutch healthcare system remains uncertain. This article presents an analysis using PARTNER 3 outcomes and costs data from the Netherlands to inform a cost-utility model and examine cost implications of TAVI over SAVR in a Dutch low-risk population.
METHODS
METHODS
A two-stage cost-utility analysis was performed using a published and validated health economic model based on adverse events with both TAVI and SAVR interventions from a published randomized low risk trial dataset, and a Markov model that captured lifetime healthcare costs and patient outcomes post-intervention. The model was adapted using Netherlands-specific cost data to assess the cost-effectiveness of TAVI and SAVR. Uncertainty was addressed using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.
RESULTS
RESULTS
TAVI generated 0.89 additional quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at a €4742 increase in costs per patient compared with SAVR over a lifetime time horizon, representing an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €5346 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses confirm robust results, with TAVI remaining cost-effective across several sensitivity analyses.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the model results, compared with SAVR, TAVI with SAPIEN 3 appears cost-effective for the treatment of Dutch patients with sSAS who are at low risk of surgical mortality. Qualitative data suggest broader societal benefits are likely and these findings could be used to optimize appropriate intervention selection for this patient population.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38528520
doi: 10.1186/s12962-024-00531-6
pii: 10.1186/s12962-024-00531-6
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
24Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Thourani VH, Suri RM, Gunter RL, Sheng S, O’Brien SM, Ailawadi G, et al. Contemporary real-world outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement in 141,905 low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk patients. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015;99(1):55–61.
doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2014.06.050
pubmed: 25442986
Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ, De Bonis M, Hamm C, Holm PJ, et al. 2017 ESC/EACTS guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J. 2017;38(36):2739–91.
doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehx391
pubmed: 28886619
Cahill TJ, Chen M, Hayashida K, Latib A, Modine T, Piazza N, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: current status and future perspectives. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(28):2625–34.
doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy244
pubmed: 29718148
Cribier A. The development of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Glob Cardiol Sci Pract. 2016;2016(4):e201632.
pubmed: 28979902
pmcid: 5624190
Leon MB, Mack MJ, Hahn RT, Thourani VH, Makkar R, Kodali SK, et al. Outcomes 2 years after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients at Low Surgical Risk. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021;77(9):1149–61.
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.12.052
pubmed: 33663731
Mack MJ, Leon MB, Thourani VH, Makkar R, Kodali SK, Russo M, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a balloon-expandable valve in low-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(18):1695–705.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1814052
pubmed: 30883058
Ando T, Briasoulis A, Holmes AA, Taub CC, Takagi H, Afonso L. Sapien 3 versus Sapien XT prosthetic valves in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. 2016;220:472–8.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.06.159
pubmed: 27390972
Popma JJ, Deeb GM, Yakubov SJ, Mumtaz M, Gada H, O’Hair D, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a self-expanding valve in low-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(18):1706–15.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1816885
pubmed: 30883053
ElGuindy A. PARTNER 2A & SAPIEN 3: TAVI for intermediate risk patients. Glob Cardiol Sci Pract. 2016;2016(4):e201633.
pubmed: 31463304
pmcid: 5584311
Thyregod HGH, Ihlemann N, Jorgensen TH, Nissen H, Kjeldsen BJ, Petursson P et al. Five-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes from the nordic aortic valve intervention (NOTION) Randomized Clinical Trial in Lower Surgical Risk patients. Circulation. 2019.
Durko AP, Osnabrugge RL, Van Mieghem NM, Milojevic M, Mylotte D, Nkomo VT, et al. Annual number of candidates for transcatheter aortic valve implantation per country: current estimates and future projections. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(28):2635–42.
doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy107
pubmed: 29546396
de Jaegere P, de Ronde M, den Heijer P, Weger A, Baan J. The history of transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the role and contribution of an early believer and adopter, the Netherlands. Neth Heart J. 2020;28(Suppl 1):128–35.
doi: 10.1007/s12471-020-01468-0
pubmed: 32780343
pmcid: 7419393
Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack MJ, Makkar RR, Svensson LG, Kodali SK, et al. Transcatheter or Surgical aortic-valve replacement in Intermediate-Risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(17):1609–20.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1514616
pubmed: 27040324
Vahanian A, Beyersdorf F, Praz F, Milojevic M, Baldus S, Bauersachs J et al. 2021 ESC/EACTS guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J. 2021.
Nederland Z. [Standpunt transcatheter aortaklepimplantatie (TAVI) bij patiënten met symptomatische ernstige aortaklepstenose (update)]. 2020.
Neyt M, Van Brabandt H, Devriese S, Van De Sande S. A cost-utility analysis of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in Belgium: focusing on a well-defined and identifiable population. BMJ Open. 2012;2(3).
Reynolds MR, Magnuson EA, Wang K, Lei Y, Vilain K, Walczak J, et al. Cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with standard care among inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis: results from the placement of aortic transcatheter valves (PARTNER) trial (cohort B). Circulation. 2012;125(9):1102–9.
doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.054072
pubmed: 22308299
Gilard M, Eltchaninoff H, Iung B. ea. Cost-effectiveness analysis of SAPIEN 3 TAVI procedure compared with surgery in patients with severe aortic stenosis at low risk of surgical mortality in France. Value Health. 2021;25(4):605– 13.
Health Information and Quality Authority. Health Technology Assessment of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis at low and intermediate risk of surgical complications. 2019.Available from: https://www.hiqa.ie/sites/default/files/2020-06/HIQA-Annual-Report-2019.pdf . Accessed March 2024.
Norweigan Institue of Public Health. Health Technology Assessment: Transcatether aortic valve implantation (TAVI) as treatment of patients with severe aortic stenosis and intermediate surgical risk– Part 2. Health economic evaluation 2019. Available from: https://nyemetoder.no/Documents/Rapporter/ID2016_076%20TAVI_cost-effectiveness.pdf . Accessed March 2024.
Haute Autorité de santé. SAPIEN 3 Modèle 9600 TFX bioprothese valvulaire aortique avec systeme de mise en place Edwards Commander 2021. Available from: https://www.has-sante.fr/jcms/p_3244168/fr/sapien-3-modele-9600-tfx-bioprothese-valvulaire-aortique-avec-systeme-de-mise-en-place-edwards-commander#analyseEco . Accessed March 2024.
SAPIEN 3. Traitement de la sténose aortique sévère symptomatique en France chez les patients à faible risque chirurgical 2021. Available from: https://www.has-sante.fr/upload/docs/application/pdf/2021-04/sapien3_9022021_avis_economique_vf2.pdf . Accessed March 2024.
Kuck KH, Leidl R, Frankenstein L, Wahlers T, Sarmah A, Candolfi P et al. Cost-effectiveness of SAPIEN 3 transcatheter aortic valve implantation Versus Surgical aortic valve replacement in German severe aortic stenosis patients at Low Surgical Mortality Risk. Adv Ther. 2023.
Mennini FS, Meucci F, Pesarini G, Vandoni P, Lettino M, Sarmah A, et al. Cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement in low surgical risk aortic stenosis patients. Int J Cardiol. 2022;357:26–32.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2022.03.034
pubmed: 35306028
Vázquez Rodríguez JM, Bermúdez EP, Zamorano JL, Burgos JM, Díaz-Fernández JF, del Blanco BG, et al. Cost-effectiveness of SAPIEN 3 transcatheter aortic valve implantation in low surgical mortality risk patients in Spain. REC Interv Cardiol. 2023;5:38–45.
Dubois C, Adriaenssens T, Annemans L, Bosmans J, Callebaut B, Candolfi P, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement in severe aortic stenosis patients at low surgical mortality risk: a cost-effectiveness analysis in Belgium. Acta Cardiol. 2024;79(1):46–57.
doi: 10.1080/00015385.2023.2282283
pubmed: 38450496
Versteegh M, Knies S, Brouwer W. From Good to Better: New Dutch guidelines for economic evaluations in Healthcare. PharmacoEconomics. 2016;34(11):1071–4.
doi: 10.1007/s40273-016-0431-y
pubmed: 27613159
Vermond RA, Geelhoed B, Verweij N, Tieleman RG, Van der Harst P, Hillege HL, et al. Incidence of Atrial Fibrillation and Relationship with Cardiovascular events, heart failure, and Mortality: A Community-based study from the Netherlands. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66(9):1000–7.
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.06.1314
pubmed: 26314526
Bourguignon T, Bouquiaux-Stablo AL, Candolfi P, Mirza A, Loardi C, May MA, et al. Very long-term outcomes of the Carpentier-Edwards Perimount valve in aortic position. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015;99(3):831–7.
doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2014.09.030
pubmed: 25583467
Geisler B, Huygens S, Reardon M, Van Mieghem N, Kappetein A, Osnabrugge R, et al. Cost-effectiveness and projected survival of self-expanding transcatheter Versus Surgical aortic valve replacement for high risk patients in a European setting: a Dutch analysis based on the CoreValve High Risk Trial. Struct Heart. 2017;1(5–6):267–74.
doi: 10.1080/24748706.2017.1381357
Szende A, Janssen B, Cabases J, editors. Self-Reported Population Health: An International Perspective based on EQ-5D. Dordrecht (NL)2014.
Baeten SA, van Exel NJ, Dirks M, Koopmanschap MA, Dippel DW, Niessen LW. Lifetime health effects and medical costs of integrated stroke services - a non-randomized controlled cluster-trial based life table approach. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2010;8:21.
doi: 10.1186/1478-7547-8-21
pubmed: 21083901
pmcid: 2998455
Jacobs MS, de Jong LA, Postma MJ, Tieleman RG, van Hulst M. Health economic evaluation of rivaroxaban in elective cardioversion of atrial fibrillation. Eur J Health Econ. 2018;19(7):957–65.
doi: 10.1007/s10198-017-0942-2
pubmed: 29181817
Osnabrugge RL, Head SJ, Genders TS, Van Mieghem NM, De Jaegere PP, van der Boon RM, et al. Costs of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients. Ann Thorac Surg. 2012;94(6):1954–60.
doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.07.002
pubmed: 22959568
Huygens SA, Goossens LMA, van Erkelens JA, Takkenberg JJM, Rutten-van Molken M. How much does a heart valve implantation cost and what are the health care costs afterwards? Open Heart. 2018;5(1):e000672.
doi: 10.1136/openhrt-2017-000672
pubmed: 29531755
pmcid: 5845412
Statistics Netherlands. Consumer prices; price index. den Haag-Heerlen 2020. Available from: https://opendata.cbs.nl/statline/#/CBS/nl/dataset/70936NED/table?dl=51EAD . Accessed March 2024.
Nederland Z. March. Kosteneffectiviteit in de praktijk 2015. Available from: https://www.zorginstituutnederland.nl/binaries/zinl/documenten/rapport/2015/06/26/kosteneffectiviteit-in-de-praktijk/Kosteneffectiviteit+in+de+praktijk.pdf . Accessed 2024.
Tam DY, Azizi PM, Fremes SE, Chikwe J, Gaudino M, Wijeysundera HC. The cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in low surgical risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes. 2020.
Zhou JY, Liew D, Duffy SJ, Walton A, Htun N, Stub D. Cost-effectiveness of Transcatheter Versus Surgical aortic valve replacement in low-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. Heart Lung Circ. 2021;30(4):547–54.
doi: 10.1016/j.hlc.2020.09.934
pubmed: 33189571
Statline. March. Levensverwachting; geslacht, leeftijd (per jaar en periode van vijf jaren) 2023. Available from: https://opendata.cbs.nl/statline/#/CBS/nl/dataset/37360ned/table?froms . Accessed 2024.
Kelly-Hayes M. Influence of age and health behaviors on stroke risk: lessons from longitudinal studies. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010;58(Suppl 2):S325–8.
pubmed: 21029062
pmcid: 3006180
Mack MJ, Leon MB, Thourani VH, Pibarot P, Hahn RT, Genereux P, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement in low-risk patients at five years. N Engl J Med. 2023;389(21):1949–60.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2307447
pubmed: 37874020
den Heijer P. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: first choice for aortic stenosis? Neth Heart J. 2020;28(5):227–8.
doi: 10.1007/s12471-020-01419-9