Key result
Dedicated CTEPH follow-up after pulmonary embolism adds ~1 QALY cost-effectively, favored by InShape IV.
Why the study?
Dedicated follow-up strategies to achieve an early CTEPH diagnosis in PE survivors involve costs that were not explicitly incorporated in previous cost-effectiveness models.
Do dedicated follow-up algorithms improve quality-adjusted life-years in a cost-effective manner for acute pulmonary embolism survivors compared to no dedicated follow-up?
Do dedicated follow-up algorithms improve quality-adjusted life-years in a cost-effective manner for acute pulmonary embolism survivors compared to no dedicated follow-up?
Implementing a dedicated diagnostic follow-up pathway for CTEPH after acute pulmonary embolism is highly cost-effective and provides significant long-term quality-of-life benefits.
May support cost-effective CTEPH follow-up post-PE; leaves open prospective validation before routine adoption.
Introduction: Achieving an early diagnosis of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) in pulmonary embolism (PE) survivors results in better quality of life and survival. Importantly, dedicated follow-up strategies to achieve an earlier CTEPH diagnosis involve costs that were not explicitly incorporated in the models assessing their cost-effectiveness. We performed an economic evaluation of 11 distinct PE follow-up algorithms to determine which should be preferred. Materials and methods: 11 different PE follow-up algorithms and one hypothetical scenario without a dedicated CTEPH follow-up algorithm were included in a Markov model. Diagnostic accuracy of consecutive tests was estimated from patient-level data of the InShape II study (n=424). The lifelong costs per CTEPH patient were compared and related to quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for each scenario. Results: Compared to not performing dedicated follow-up, the integrated follow-up algorithms are associated with an estimated increase of 0.89-1.2 QALYs against an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of EUR 25 700-46 300 per QALY per CTEPH patient. When comparing different algorithms with each other, the maximum differences were 0.27 QALYs and EUR 27 600. The most cost-effective algorithm was the InShape IV algorithm, with an ICER of EUR 26 700 per QALY compared to the next best algorithm. Conclusion: Subjecting all PE survivors to any of the currently established dedicated follow-up algorithms to detect CTEPH is cost-effective and preferred above not performing a dedicated follow-up, evaluated against the Dutch acceptability threshold of EUR 50 000 per QALY. The model can be used to identify the locally preferred algorithm from an economical point-of-view within local logistical possibilities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Luijten et al. (2024) studied Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) survivors (n=424). Dedicated CTEPH follow-up algorithms (e.g., InShape IV) vs. No dedicated follow-up was evaluated on Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per QALY gained (ICER of EUR 25,700-46,300 per QALY). Dedicated follow-up algorithms to detect CTEPH in pulmonary embolism survivors increased QALYs by 0.89-1.2 at an ICER of EUR 25,700-46,300 per QALY, with the InShape IV algorithm being highly cost-effective.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: