Cost-effectiveness of SAPIEN 3 transcatheter aortic valve implantation in low surgical mortality risk patients in Spain

Q2 Medicine
J. V. Vázquez Rodríguez, E. Pinar Bermúdez, J. Luis Zamorano, J. Moreu Burgos, J. Díaz-Fernández, Bruno García del Blanco, A. Sarmah, P. Candolfi, Judith Shore, and, Michelle Green
{"title":"Cost-effectiveness of SAPIEN 3 transcatheter aortic valve implantation in low surgical mortality risk patients in Spain","authors":"J. V. Vázquez Rodríguez, E. Pinar Bermúdez, J. Luis Zamorano, J. Moreu Burgos, J. Díaz-Fernández, Bruno García del Blanco, A. Sarmah, P. Candolfi, Judith Shore, and, Michelle Green","doi":"10.24875/recice.m22000340","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction and objectives: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) was first introduced in 2007 as an alternative to open heart surgery to treat patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (sSAS) with various indication expansions since that date. Recently, the PARTNER 3 study (Placement of aortic transcatheter valve) demonstrated clinical benefits with TAVI with the SAPIEN 3 valve vs surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in selected low surgical mortality risk patients. We reviewed data from the PARTNER 3 and economic data from Spain to assess the cost-effectiveness ratio of TAVI vs SAVR in patients with sSAS and low surgical mortality risk. Methods: A 2-stage model was used to estimate direct healthcare costs and health-related quality of life data regarding TAVI with the SAPIEN 3 valve and SAVR. Early adverse events associated with TAVI from the PARTNER 3 were fed into a Markov model that captured longer-term outcomes after TAVI or SAVR. Results: TAVI with SAPIEN 3 improved quality-adjusted life years per patient (+ 1.00) with an increase in costs vs SAVR (€6971 per patient). This meant an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio/quality-adjusted life year of €6952 per patient. The results were robust with TAVI with the SAPIEN 3 valve remaining cost-effective across several sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: TAVI with the SAPIEN 3 valve is cost effective compared to SAVR in patients with sSAS and low surgical mortality risk. These findings can inform policymakers to facilitate policy development in Spain on intervention selection in this patient population. 3 valve was more clinically favorable compared to SAVR in patients with sSAS and low surgical mortality risk. The results of this robust, cost-effective- ness analysis indicate that, in Spain, TAVI could provide a cost-effective option over SAVR for this population with an estimated ICER/QALY value well below the national threshold. Data from the PARTNER 3 together with data from this cost-effectiveness analysis can support policy makers and healthcare budget holders to optimize the management of Spanish patients with sSAS.","PeriodicalId":34613,"journal":{"name":"REC Interventional Cardiology English Ed","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"REC Interventional Cardiology English Ed","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24875/recice.m22000340","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction and objectives: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) was first introduced in 2007 as an alternative to open heart surgery to treat patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (sSAS) with various indication expansions since that date. Recently, the PARTNER 3 study (Placement of aortic transcatheter valve) demonstrated clinical benefits with TAVI with the SAPIEN 3 valve vs surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in selected low surgical mortality risk patients. We reviewed data from the PARTNER 3 and economic data from Spain to assess the cost-effectiveness ratio of TAVI vs SAVR in patients with sSAS and low surgical mortality risk. Methods: A 2-stage model was used to estimate direct healthcare costs and health-related quality of life data regarding TAVI with the SAPIEN 3 valve and SAVR. Early adverse events associated with TAVI from the PARTNER 3 were fed into a Markov model that captured longer-term outcomes after TAVI or SAVR. Results: TAVI with SAPIEN 3 improved quality-adjusted life years per patient (+ 1.00) with an increase in costs vs SAVR (€6971 per patient). This meant an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio/quality-adjusted life year of €6952 per patient. The results were robust with TAVI with the SAPIEN 3 valve remaining cost-effective across several sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: TAVI with the SAPIEN 3 valve is cost effective compared to SAVR in patients with sSAS and low surgical mortality risk. These findings can inform policymakers to facilitate policy development in Spain on intervention selection in this patient population. 3 valve was more clinically favorable compared to SAVR in patients with sSAS and low surgical mortality risk. The results of this robust, cost-effective- ness analysis indicate that, in Spain, TAVI could provide a cost-effective option over SAVR for this population with an estimated ICER/QALY value well below the national threshold. Data from the PARTNER 3 together with data from this cost-effectiveness analysis can support policy makers and healthcare budget holders to optimize the management of Spanish patients with sSAS.
西班牙SAPIEN3经导管主动脉瓣植入术治疗低手术死亡率患者的成本效益
简介和目的:经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)于2007年首次引入,作为心脏直视手术的替代方案,用于治疗自那时起各种适应症扩大的严重症状性主动脉瓣狭窄(sSAS)患者。最近,PARTNER 3研究(经导管主动脉瓣置入术)表明,在选择的低手术死亡率患者中,使用SAPIEN 3瓣膜的TAVI与手术主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)相比具有临床益处。我们回顾了PARTNER 3的数据和西班牙的经济数据,以评估TAVI与SAVR在低手术死亡风险的sSAS患者中的成本-效果比。方法:采用两阶段模型估计与SAPIEN 3瓣膜和SAVR相关的TAVI的直接医疗保健费用和健康相关的生活质量数据。PARTNER 3中与TAVI相关的早期不良事件被输入马尔可夫模型,该模型捕获了TAVI或SAVR后的长期结果。结果:与SAVR相比,SAPIEN 3的TAVI提高了每位患者的质量调整生命年(+ 1.00),成本增加(每位患者6971欧元)。这意味着每位患者的增量成本效益比/质量调整生命年为6952欧元。TAVI的结果是稳健的,SAPIEN 3阀在几个敏感性分析中仍然具有成本效益。结论:在sSAS患者中,与SAVR相比,SAPIEN 3瓣膜的TAVI具有成本效益,手术死亡率低。这些发现可以为决策者提供信息,以促进西班牙在这一患者群体中选择干预措施的政策制定。在sSAS患者中,与SAVR相比,3瓣在临床上更有利,手术死亡率低。这一强有力的、具有成本效益的分析结果表明,在西班牙,TAVI可以为这一人群提供比SAVR更具成本效益的选择,其估计的ICER/QALY值远低于国家门槛。PARTNER 3的数据以及本成本效益分析的数据可以支持政策制定者和医疗保健预算持有人优化对西班牙sSAS患者的管理。
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
REC Interventional Cardiology English Ed
REC Interventional Cardiology English Ed Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
86
审稿时长
15 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