Key result
Optimal contact force sensing during AF ablation lowers first-year healthcare costs by ~$3,402 vs standard ablation.
Why the study?
To determine the economic impact of using contact force sensing during catheter ablation for AF by linking trial events to a large claims database.
Does optimal contact force sensing during catheter ablation reduce healthcare costs in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Does optimal contact force sensing during catheter ablation reduce healthcare costs in patients with atrial fibrillation?
The use of optimal contact force sensing during atrial fibrillation ablation is associated with significantly lower healthcare costs in the year following the procedure.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May lower post-ablation costs with contact force sensing in AF; hypothesis-generating, needs randomized confirmation before practice change.
AIMS: The TactiCath Contact Force Ablation Catheter Study for Atrial Fibrillation (TOCCASTAR) clinical trial compared clinical outcomes using a contact force (CF) sensing ablation catheter (TactiCath) with a catheter that lacked CF measurement. This analysis links recorded events in the TOCCASTAR study and a large claims database, IBM MarketScan®, to determine the economic impact of using CF sensing during atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Clinical events including repeat ablation, use of antiarrhythmic drugs, hospitalization, perforation, pericarditis, pneumothorax, pulmonary edema, pulmonary vein stenosis, tamponade, and vascular access complications were adjudicated in the year after ablation. CF was characterized as optimal if greater than or equal to 90% lesion was performed with greater than or equal to 10 g of CF. A probabilistic 1:1 linkage was created for subjects in MarketScan® with the same events in the year after ablation, and the cost was evaluated over 10 000 iterations. Of the 279 subjects in TOCCASTAR, 145 were ablated using CF (57% with optimal CF), and 134 were ablated without CF. In the MarketScan® cohort, 9811 subjects who underwent AF ablation were used to determine events and costs. For subjects ablated with optimal CF, total cost was $19 271 ± 3705 in the year after ablation. For ablation lacking CF measurement, cost was $22 673 ± 3079 (difference of $3402, P < .001). In 73% of simulations, optimal CF was associated with lower cost in the year after ablation. CONCLUSION: Compared to ablation without CF, there was a decrease in healthcare cost of $3402 per subject in the first year after the procedure when optimal CF was used.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mansour et al. (2019) studied Atrial fibrillation (n=279). Contact force (CF) sensing ablation catheter (optimal CF) vs. Ablation catheter lacking CF measurement was evaluated on Total healthcare cost in the year after ablation (Difference of $3402, p=<.001). Optimal contact force sensing during atrial fibrillation ablation reduced healthcare costs by $3402 per subject in the first year compared to ablation without contact force measurement (P<.001).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: