These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Cost-Effectiveness of Endovascular Femoropopliteal Intervention Using Drug-Coated Balloons Versus Standard Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty: Results From the IN.PACT SFA II Trial.
    Author: Salisbury AC, Li H, Vilain KR, Jaff MR, Schneider PA, Laird JR, Cohen DJ.
    Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv; 2016 Nov 28; 9(22):2343-2352. PubMed ID: 27884360.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty versus standard percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA). BACKGROUND: Recent trials have reported lower rates of target lesion revascularization with DCB angioplasty versus standard PTA. However, the cost-effectiveness of DCB angioplasty is unknown. METHODS: A prospective economic study was performed alongside the IN.PACT SFA II (IN.PACT Admiral Drug-Coated Balloon vs. Standard Balloon Angioplasty for the Treatment of Superficial Femoral Artery [SFA] and Proximal Popliteal Artery [PPA]) trial, which randomized 181 patients with femoropopliteal disease to the IN.PACT DCB versus standard PTA. Resource use data were collected over 2-year follow-up, and costs were assigned using resource-based accounting and billing data. Health utilities were assessed using the EuroQol 5-dimensions questionnaire. Cost-effectiveness was assessed as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained using a decision-analytic model on the basis of empirical data from the trial assuming identical long-term mortality. RESULTS: Initial costs were $1,129 per patient higher with DCB angioplasty than standard PTA, driven by higher costs for the DCB itself. Between discharge and 24 months, target limb-related costs were $1,212 per patient lower with DCB angioplasty such that discounted 2-year costs were similar for the 2 groups ($11,277 vs. $11,359, p = 0.97), whereas QALYs tended to be greater among patients treated with DCBs (1.53 ± 0.44 vs. 1.47 ± 0.42, p = 0.40). The probability that DCB angioplasty is cost-effective compared with standard PTA was 70% using a threshold of $50,000 per QALY gained and 79% at a threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with femoropopliteal disease, DCB angioplasty is associated with better 2-year outcomes and similar target limb-related costs compared with standard PTA. Formal cost-effectiveness analysis on the basis of these results suggests that use of the DCB angioplasty is likely to be economically attractive.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]