Cargando…

A cost-utility analysis comparing endovascular coiling to neurosurgical clipping in the treatment of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage

Endovascular coiling (EC) has been identified in systematic reviews and meta-analyses to produce more favourable clinical outcomes in comparison to neurosurgical clipping (NC) when surgically treating a subarachnoid haemorrhage from a ruptured aneurysm. Cost-effectiveness analyses between both inter...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ahmed, Ayla, Ahmed, Yonis, Duah-Asante, Kwaku, Lawal, Abayomi, Mohiaddin, Zain, Nawab, Hasan, Tang, Alexis, Wang, Brian, Miller, George, Malawana, Johann
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9492573/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36056977
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10143-022-01854-9
_version_ 1784793513043427328
author Ahmed, Ayla
Ahmed, Yonis
Duah-Asante, Kwaku
Lawal, Abayomi
Mohiaddin, Zain
Nawab, Hasan
Tang, Alexis
Wang, Brian
Miller, George
Malawana, Johann
author_facet Ahmed, Ayla
Ahmed, Yonis
Duah-Asante, Kwaku
Lawal, Abayomi
Mohiaddin, Zain
Nawab, Hasan
Tang, Alexis
Wang, Brian
Miller, George
Malawana, Johann
author_sort Ahmed, Ayla
collection PubMed
description Endovascular coiling (EC) has been identified in systematic reviews and meta-analyses to produce more favourable clinical outcomes in comparison to neurosurgical clipping (NC) when surgically treating a subarachnoid haemorrhage from a ruptured aneurysm. Cost-effectiveness analyses between both interventions have been done, but no cost-utility analysis has yet been published. This systematic review aims to perform an economic analysis of the relative utility outcomes and costs from both treatments in the UK. A cost-utility analysis was performed from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS), over a 1-year analytic horizon. Outcomes were obtained from the randomised International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) and measured in terms of the patient’s modified Rankin scale (mRS) grade, a 6-point disability scale that aims to quantify a patient’s functional outcome following a stroke. The mRS score was weighted against the Euro-QoL 5-dimension (EQ-5D), with each state assigned a weighted utility value which was then converted into quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). A sensitivity analysis using different utility dimensions was performed to identify any variation in incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) if different input variables were used. Costs were measured in pounds sterling (£) and discounted by 3.5% to 2020/2021 prices. The cost-utility analysis showed an ICER of − £144,004 incurred for every QALY gained when EC was utilised over NC. At NICE’s upper willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of £30,000, EC offered a monetary net benefit (MNB) of £7934.63 and health net benefit (HNB) of 0.264 higher than NC. At NICE’s lower WTP threshold of £20,000, EC offered an MNB of £7478.63 and HNB of 0.374 higher than NC. EC was found to be more ‘cost-effective’ than NC, with an ICER in the bottom right quadrant of the cost-effectiveness plane—indicating that it offers greater benefits at lower costs. This is supported by the ICER being below the NICE’s threshold of £20,000–£30,000 per QALY, and both MNB and HNB having positive values (> 0).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9492573
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94925732022-09-23 A cost-utility analysis comparing endovascular coiling to neurosurgical clipping in the treatment of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage Ahmed, Ayla Ahmed, Yonis Duah-Asante, Kwaku Lawal, Abayomi Mohiaddin, Zain Nawab, Hasan Tang, Alexis Wang, Brian Miller, George Malawana, Johann Neurosurg Rev Original Article Endovascular coiling (EC) has been identified in systematic reviews and meta-analyses to produce more favourable clinical outcomes in comparison to neurosurgical clipping (NC) when surgically treating a subarachnoid haemorrhage from a ruptured aneurysm. Cost-effectiveness analyses between both interventions have been done, but no cost-utility analysis has yet been published. This systematic review aims to perform an economic analysis of the relative utility outcomes and costs from both treatments in the UK. A cost-utility analysis was performed from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS), over a 1-year analytic horizon. Outcomes were obtained from the randomised International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) and measured in terms of the patient’s modified Rankin scale (mRS) grade, a 6-point disability scale that aims to quantify a patient’s functional outcome following a stroke. The mRS score was weighted against the Euro-QoL 5-dimension (EQ-5D), with each state assigned a weighted utility value which was then converted into quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). A sensitivity analysis using different utility dimensions was performed to identify any variation in incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) if different input variables were used. Costs were measured in pounds sterling (£) and discounted by 3.5% to 2020/2021 prices. The cost-utility analysis showed an ICER of − £144,004 incurred for every QALY gained when EC was utilised over NC. At NICE’s upper willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of £30,000, EC offered a monetary net benefit (MNB) of £7934.63 and health net benefit (HNB) of 0.264 higher than NC. At NICE’s lower WTP threshold of £20,000, EC offered an MNB of £7478.63 and HNB of 0.374 higher than NC. EC was found to be more ‘cost-effective’ than NC, with an ICER in the bottom right quadrant of the cost-effectiveness plane—indicating that it offers greater benefits at lower costs. This is supported by the ICER being below the NICE’s threshold of £20,000–£30,000 per QALY, and both MNB and HNB having positive values (> 0). Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-09-03 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9492573/ /pubmed/36056977 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10143-022-01854-9 Text en © Crown 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Ahmed, Ayla
Ahmed, Yonis
Duah-Asante, Kwaku
Lawal, Abayomi
Mohiaddin, Zain
Nawab, Hasan
Tang, Alexis
Wang, Brian
Miller, George
Malawana, Johann
A cost-utility analysis comparing endovascular coiling to neurosurgical clipping in the treatment of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage
title A cost-utility analysis comparing endovascular coiling to neurosurgical clipping in the treatment of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage
title_full A cost-utility analysis comparing endovascular coiling to neurosurgical clipping in the treatment of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage
title_fullStr A cost-utility analysis comparing endovascular coiling to neurosurgical clipping in the treatment of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage
title_full_unstemmed A cost-utility analysis comparing endovascular coiling to neurosurgical clipping in the treatment of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage
title_short A cost-utility analysis comparing endovascular coiling to neurosurgical clipping in the treatment of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage
title_sort cost-utility analysis comparing endovascular coiling to neurosurgical clipping in the treatment of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9492573/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36056977
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10143-022-01854-9
work_keys_str_mv AT ahmedayla acostutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT ahmedyonis acostutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT duahasantekwaku acostutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT lawalabayomi acostutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT mohiaddinzain acostutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT nawabhasan acostutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT tangalexis acostutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT wangbrian acostutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT millergeorge acostutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT malawanajohann acostutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT ahmedayla costutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT ahmedyonis costutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT duahasantekwaku costutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT lawalabayomi costutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT mohiaddinzain costutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT nawabhasan costutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT tangalexis costutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT wangbrian costutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT millergeorge costutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage
AT malawanajohann costutilityanalysiscomparingendovascularcoilingtoneurosurgicalclippinginthetreatmentofaneurysmalsubarachnoidhaemorrhage