Why the study?
Growing interest in surgical ablation for AFib prompted an evaluation of the cost-effectiveness and management of surgical treatment in southern Mainland China.
Is catheter ablation cost-effective compared to surgery as usual in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Is catheter ablation cost-effective compared to surgery as usual in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation was associated with remarkably higher costs compared to usual surgery, resulting in an extremely high incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in a Chinese cohort.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Unfavorable ICER suggests limited value in this cohort; leaves open cost-effectiveness elsewhere pending randomized data.
BACKGROUND: The pursuit of a clearer understanding of the pathogenesis of atrial fibrillation (AFib) and the development of new technology has resulted in a surge of interest in the surgical ablation for AFib. Here, we report our 8-year experience in the surgical treatment and management of AFib alongside, evaluating the cost-effectiveness in southern Mainland China over a 1-year follow-up. METHODS: Data of 3,068 patients from March 2011 through June 2019 was retrospectively extracted from The Provincial National Cardiac Database of Xiangya Second Hospital. The activities considered (and costs calculated) were outpatient consultations, hospital admissions, and drug treatment. Quality of life (QoL) questionnaires were also carried out to assess whether concomitant AFib correction procedures increase risk in patients, or improve patient's QoL. RESULTS: A total of 3,068 patients completed the questionnaires at a minimum of one time-point during the follow-up. The total cost was combined to obtain incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The total costs of the AFib catheter ablation group were remarkably higher compared to surgery as usual group. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $76,513,227 (¥542,287,667) per QALY, with an acceptability line graph for cost at 43%. CONCLUSIONS: AFib is an extraordinarily costly and worrisome public health problem. Precision medicine is vital as it provides a platform for the clinical translation of targeted interventions that are designed to help treat and prevent AFib. Thus, to improve the QoL expectancy outcome(s), both therapeutic and surgical interventions should be aimed at addressing the underlying heart disease rather than restoring sinus rhythm.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Iroegbu et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: