Cost‐effectiveness of revascularization in patients with intermittent claudication. BJS 2018; 105: 1742-1748.
Published: 25th October 2018
Authors: H. Djerf, M. Falkenberg, L. Jivegård, H. Lindgren, M. Svensson, J. Nordanstig et al.
Revascularization is a treatment option for patients with intermittent claudication. However, there is a lack of evidence to support its long‐term benefits and cost‐effectiveness. The aim of this study was to compare the cost‐effectiveness of revascularization and best medical therapy (BMT) with that of BMT alone.
Data were used from the IRONIC (Invasive Revascularization Or Not in Intermittent Claudication) RCT where consecutive patients with mild‐to‐severe intermittent claudication owing to aortoiliac or femoropopliteal disease were allocated to either BMT alone (including a structured, non‐supervised exercise programme) or to revascularization together with BMT. Inpatient and outpatient costs were obtained prospectively over 24 months of follow‐up. Mean improvement in quality‐adjusted life‐years (QALYs) was calculated based on responses to the EuroQol Five Dimensions EQ‐5D‐3 L™ questionnaire. Cost‐effectiveness was assessed as the cost per QALY gained.
A total of 158 patients were randomized, 79 to each group. The mean cost per patient in the BMT group was €1901, whereas it was €8280 in the group treated with revascularization in addition to BMT, with a cost difference of €6379 (95 per cent c.i. €4229 to 8728) per patient. Revascularization in addition to BMT resulted in a mean gain in QALYs of 0·16 (95 per cent c.i. 0·06 to 0·24) per patient, giving an incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio of €42 881 per QALY.
The costs associated with revascularization together with BMT in patients with intermittent claudication were about four times higher than those of BMT alone. The incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio of revascularization was within the accepted threshold for public willingness to pay according to the Swedish National Guidelines, but exceeded that of the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines.Full text
You may also be interested in
Cost‐effectiveness analysis of a randomized clinical trial of early versus deferred endovenous ablation of superficial venous reflux in patients with venous ulceration.
Authors: D. M. Epstein, M. S. Gohel, F. Heatley, X. Liu, A. Bradbury, R. Bulbulia et al.
Authors: R. Svensson‐Björk, M. Zarrouk, G. Asciutto, J. Hasselmann, S. Acosta
Cost‐effectiveness of targeted screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm in siblings. BJS 2019; 106: 206-216.
Authors: R. Hultgren, A. Linné, S. Svensjö
Notes: Cost effective
Authors: M. A. Waduud, B. Wood, P. Keleabetswe, J. Manning, E. Linton, M. Drozd et al.
Systematic review of endovascular intervention and surgery for common femoral artery atherosclerotic disease. BJS 2019; 106: 13-22.
Authors: X. Jia, Z. D. Sun, J. V. Patel, K. Flood, D. D. Stocken, D. J. A. Scott et al.
Sex differences in national rates of repair of emergency abdominal aortic aneurysm. BJS 2019; 106: 82-89.
Authors: A. Aber, T. S. Tong, J. Chilcott, P. Thokala, R. Maheswaran, S. M. Thomas et al.
Notes: Why worse for women?
Systematic review of the safety and efficacy of osseointegration prosthesis after limb amputation. BJS 2018; 105: 1731-1741.
Authors: S. K. Kunutsor, D. Gillatt, A. W. Blom
Notes: Technology with potential
Authors: H. Shiwani, P. Baxter, E. Taylor, M. A. Bailey, D. J. A. Scott
Local anaesthesia for endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. BJS 2019; 106: 74-81.
Authors: R. Mouton, C. A. Rogers, R. A. Harris, R. J. Hinchliffe
Notes: Improves 30‐day survival
Long‐term outcomes of endovenous laser ablation and conventional surgery for great saphenous varicose veins. BJS 2018; 105: 1759-1767.
Authors: T. Wallace, J. El‐Sheikha, S. Nandhra, C. Leung, A. Mohamed, A. Harwood et al.
Notes: Lower recurrence at 5 years after laser
Predicting risk of rupture and rupture‐preventing reinterventions following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. BJS 2018; 105: 1294-1304.
Authors: I. Grootes, J. K. Barrett, P. Ulug, F. Rohlffs, S. J. Laukontaus, R. Tulamo et al.
Notes: Potential to tailor surveillance
Authors: A. J. A. Meershoek, G. J. de Borst