Key result
Minimalist TAVR linked to similar outcomes and ~$11,300 lower 30-day costs versus conventional TAVR.
Why the study?
The economic impact of a minimalist transfemoral TAVR pathway with next-day discharge compared with conventional TAVR was unknown.
Does a minimalist TAVR pathway reduce costs compared to conventional TAVR in intermediate-risk patients?
Cohort (n=702)
Does a minimalist TAVR pathway reduce costs compared to conventional TAVR in intermediate-risk patients?
A minimalist TAVR pathway in intermediate-risk patients yields similar clinical outcomes with substantial in-hospital and 30-day cost savings compared to conventional TAVR.
Minimalist TAVR linked to lower 30-day costs in observational data; leaves open confirmation by randomized trials before practice change.
Background: The 3M-TAVR trial (3M-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement) demonstrated the feasibility and safety of next-day hospital discharge after transfemoral TAVR with implementation of a minimalist pathway. However, the economic impact of this approach is unknown. Therefore, we evaluated costs for patients undergoing minimalist TAVR compared with conventional TAVR. Methods: We used propensity matching to compare resource utilization and costs (from a US health care system perspective) for patients in the 3M-TAVR trial with those for transfemoral TAVR patients enrolled in the contemporaneous S3i trial (PARTNER SAPIEN-3 Intermediate Risk). Procedural costs were estimated using measured resource utilization for both groups. For the S3i group, all other costs through 30-day follow-up were assessed by linkage with Medicare claims; for 3M, these costs were assessed using regression models derived from S3i cost and resource utilization data. Results: After 1:1 propensity matching, 351 pairs were included in our study (mean age 82, mean Society of Thoracic Surgery risk score 5.3%). There were no differences in death, stroke, or rehospitalization between the 3M-TAVR and S3i groups through 30-day follow-up. Index hospitalization costs were $10 843/patient lower in the 3M-TAVR cohort, driven by reductions in procedure duration, anesthesia costs, and length of stay. Between discharge and 30 days, costs were similar for the 2 groups such that cumulative 30-day costs were $11 305/patient lower in the 3M-TAVR cohort compared with the S3i cohort ($49 425 versus $60 729, 95% CI for difference $9378 to $13 138; P <0.001). Conclusions: Compared with conventional transfemoral TAVR, use of a minimalist pathway in intermediate-risk patients was associated with similar clinical outcomes and substantial in-hospital cost savings, which were sustained through 30 days. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT02287662.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Butala et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Transfemoral TAVR in intermediate-risk patients (n=702). Minimalist TAVR pathway (3M-TAVR) vs. Conventional TAVR (S3i trial) was evaluated on Cumulative 30-day costs (Difference $11,305 lower, 95% CI 9378 to 13 138, p=<0.001). A minimalist TAVR pathway in intermediate-risk patients was associated with similar clinical outcomes and $11,305 lower cumulative 30-day costs compared with conventional TAVR (P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: