Economic Evaluation of Catheter Ablation Versus Medical Therapy for the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation from the Perspective of the UK.

IF 2.6 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Lisa Wm Leung, Zaki Akhtar, Christos Kontogiannis, Ryan J Imhoff, Hannah Taylor, Mark M Gallagher
{"title":"Economic Evaluation of Catheter Ablation Versus Medical Therapy for the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation from the Perspective of the UK.","authors":"Lisa Wm Leung,&nbsp;Zaki Akhtar,&nbsp;Christos Kontogiannis,&nbsp;Ryan J Imhoff,&nbsp;Hannah Taylor,&nbsp;Mark M Gallagher","doi":"10.15420/aer.2021.46","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Randomised evidence supports an early rhythm control strategy as treatment for AF, and catheter ablation outperforms medical therapy in terms of effectiveness when studied as first- and second-line treatment. Despite evidence consistently showing that catheter ablation treatment is superior to medical therapy in most AF patients, only a small proportion receive ablation, in some cases after a prolonged trial of ineffective medical therapy. Health economics research in electrophysiology remains limited but is recognised as being important in influencing positive change to ensure early access to ablation services for all eligible patients. Such information has informed the updated recommendations from the recently published National Institute for Health and Care Excellence clinical guideline on the diagnosis and management of AF, but increased awareness is needed to drive real-world adoption and to ensure patients are quickly referred to specialists. In this article, economic evaluations of catheter ablation versus medical therapy are reviewed.</p>","PeriodicalId":8412,"journal":{"name":"Arrhythmia & Electrophysiology Review","volume":" ","pages":"e13"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/78/57/aer-11-e13.PMC9277614.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arrhythmia & Electrophysiology Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15420/aer.2021.46","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Randomised evidence supports an early rhythm control strategy as treatment for AF, and catheter ablation outperforms medical therapy in terms of effectiveness when studied as first- and second-line treatment. Despite evidence consistently showing that catheter ablation treatment is superior to medical therapy in most AF patients, only a small proportion receive ablation, in some cases after a prolonged trial of ineffective medical therapy. Health economics research in electrophysiology remains limited but is recognised as being important in influencing positive change to ensure early access to ablation services for all eligible patients. Such information has informed the updated recommendations from the recently published National Institute for Health and Care Excellence clinical guideline on the diagnosis and management of AF, but increased awareness is needed to drive real-world adoption and to ensure patients are quickly referred to specialists. In this article, economic evaluations of catheter ablation versus medical therapy are reviewed.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

英国心房颤动导管消融与药物治疗的经济评价
随机证据支持早期心律控制策略作为房颤的治疗,当研究作为一线和二线治疗时,导管消融在有效性方面优于药物治疗。尽管有证据一致表明,在大多数房颤患者中,导管消融治疗优于药物治疗,但只有一小部分患者接受了消融治疗,在一些病例中,经过长期无效的药物治疗试验。电生理学的卫生经济学研究仍然有限,但被认为在影响积极变化以确保所有符合条件的患者早期获得消融服务方面具有重要意义。这些信息为最近出版的国家健康和护理卓越研究所关于房颤诊断和管理的临床指南的更新建议提供了信息,但需要提高认识以推动现实世界的采用,并确保患者迅速转诊给专家。本文综述了导管消融与药物治疗的经济评价。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Arrhythmia & Electrophysiology Review
Arrhythmia & Electrophysiology Review CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
6.70%
发文量
22
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信