Cargando…
Cost-effectiveness of Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: A Canadian Perspective
Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) affects approximately 350,000 Canadians and has an estimated annual economic burden exceeding $800 million dollars. Anti-arrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy and catheter ablation (CA) are the two common treatments for paroxysmal AF. However, the upfront costs of CA are...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Columbia Data Analytics, LLC
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10471365/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37662659 http://dx.doi.org/10.36469/9837 |
_version_ | 1785099834530725888 |
---|---|
author | Khaykin, Yaariv Mallow, Peter J. Rizzo, John A. Verma, Atul Chun, Lauren Olesovsky, Shelby Reynolds, Matthew R. |
author_facet | Khaykin, Yaariv Mallow, Peter J. Rizzo, John A. Verma, Atul Chun, Lauren Olesovsky, Shelby Reynolds, Matthew R. |
author_sort | Khaykin, Yaariv |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) affects approximately 350,000 Canadians and has an estimated annual economic burden exceeding $800 million dollars. Anti-arrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy and catheter ablation (CA) are the two common treatments for paroxysmal AF. However, the upfront costs of CA are quite substantial. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of CA compared to AAD for AF based on community practice. Methods: A Markov simulation model was developed for a hypothetical cohort of 55-year-old patients with paroxysmal AF and a low stroke risk. Patients received either CA or AAD. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were computed over lifetime, 10-year, and 5-year time horizons. Model inputs were obtained from a large, prospectively collected, single-center Canadian registry and augmented with the published literature, using Canadian cost estimates for disease states. Threshold values of $25,000, $50,000, and $100,000 per QALY, respectively, were used to determine cost-effectiveness. All costs were expressed in 2012 Canadian dollars. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for CA versus AAD therapy was $1,228, $22,879, and $63,647 for the lifetime, 10-year, and 5-year time horizons, respectively. Over a lifetime horizon, the probability of achieving cost-effectiveness was 100% for all 3 cost per QALY thresholds. The 10-year probability of achieving cost-effectiveness was 74%, 100%, and 100% at the $25,000, $50,000, and $100,000 thresholds, respectively. The 5-year probability of achieving cost-effectiveness was 0%, 0.9%, and 100% at the 3 cost per QALY thresholds. Results were most sensitive to time horizon, probability of repeat AF ablation, and stroke rate. Conclusions: From the perspective of the Canadian Healthcare system, CA is a potentially cost-effective treatment compared to AAD therapy in a low stroke risk population using real-world data when examining a time horizon of greater than 5 years. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10471365 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Columbia Data Analytics, LLC |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-104713652023-09-01 Cost-effectiveness of Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: A Canadian Perspective Khaykin, Yaariv Mallow, Peter J. Rizzo, John A. Verma, Atul Chun, Lauren Olesovsky, Shelby Reynolds, Matthew R. J Health Econ Outcomes Res Cardiovascular Conditions Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) affects approximately 350,000 Canadians and has an estimated annual economic burden exceeding $800 million dollars. Anti-arrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy and catheter ablation (CA) are the two common treatments for paroxysmal AF. However, the upfront costs of CA are quite substantial. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of CA compared to AAD for AF based on community practice. Methods: A Markov simulation model was developed for a hypothetical cohort of 55-year-old patients with paroxysmal AF and a low stroke risk. Patients received either CA or AAD. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were computed over lifetime, 10-year, and 5-year time horizons. Model inputs were obtained from a large, prospectively collected, single-center Canadian registry and augmented with the published literature, using Canadian cost estimates for disease states. Threshold values of $25,000, $50,000, and $100,000 per QALY, respectively, were used to determine cost-effectiveness. All costs were expressed in 2012 Canadian dollars. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for CA versus AAD therapy was $1,228, $22,879, and $63,647 for the lifetime, 10-year, and 5-year time horizons, respectively. Over a lifetime horizon, the probability of achieving cost-effectiveness was 100% for all 3 cost per QALY thresholds. The 10-year probability of achieving cost-effectiveness was 74%, 100%, and 100% at the $25,000, $50,000, and $100,000 thresholds, respectively. The 5-year probability of achieving cost-effectiveness was 0%, 0.9%, and 100% at the 3 cost per QALY thresholds. Results were most sensitive to time horizon, probability of repeat AF ablation, and stroke rate. Conclusions: From the perspective of the Canadian Healthcare system, CA is a potentially cost-effective treatment compared to AAD therapy in a low stroke risk population using real-world data when examining a time horizon of greater than 5 years. Columbia Data Analytics, LLC 2016-10-26 /pmc/articles/PMC10471365/ /pubmed/37662659 http://dx.doi.org/10.36469/9837 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Cardiovascular Conditions Khaykin, Yaariv Mallow, Peter J. Rizzo, John A. Verma, Atul Chun, Lauren Olesovsky, Shelby Reynolds, Matthew R. Cost-effectiveness of Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: A Canadian Perspective |
title | Cost-effectiveness of Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: A Canadian Perspective |
title_full | Cost-effectiveness of Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: A Canadian Perspective |
title_fullStr | Cost-effectiveness of Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: A Canadian Perspective |
title_full_unstemmed | Cost-effectiveness of Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: A Canadian Perspective |
title_short | Cost-effectiveness of Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: A Canadian Perspective |
title_sort | cost-effectiveness of catheter ablation versus antiarrhythmic drug therapy for the treatment of atrial fibrillation: a canadian perspective |
topic | Cardiovascular Conditions |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10471365/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37662659 http://dx.doi.org/10.36469/9837 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT khaykinyaariv costeffectivenessofcatheterablationversusantiarrhythmicdrugtherapyforthetreatmentofatrialfibrillationacanadianperspective AT mallowpeterj costeffectivenessofcatheterablationversusantiarrhythmicdrugtherapyforthetreatmentofatrialfibrillationacanadianperspective AT rizzojohna costeffectivenessofcatheterablationversusantiarrhythmicdrugtherapyforthetreatmentofatrialfibrillationacanadianperspective AT vermaatul costeffectivenessofcatheterablationversusantiarrhythmicdrugtherapyforthetreatmentofatrialfibrillationacanadianperspective AT chunlauren costeffectivenessofcatheterablationversusantiarrhythmicdrugtherapyforthetreatmentofatrialfibrillationacanadianperspective AT olesovskyshelby costeffectivenessofcatheterablationversusantiarrhythmicdrugtherapyforthetreatmentofatrialfibrillationacanadianperspective AT reynoldsmatthewr costeffectivenessofcatheterablationversusantiarrhythmicdrugtherapyforthetreatmentofatrialfibrillationacanadianperspective |