Key result
Overall direct medical costs over 12 months did not differ between Medicare-aged patients with successful versus failed atrial fibrillation ablation.
Why the study?
The direct medical costs of successful versus unsuccessful catheter ablation in Medicare-aged patients with atrial fibrillation were not well characterized.
Does successful catheter ablation reduce direct medical costs compared to unsuccessful ablation in Medicare-aged patients with atrial fibrillation?
Cohort (n=135)
Does successful catheter ablation reduce direct medical costs compared to unsuccessful ablation in Medicare-aged patients with atrial fibrillation?
In Medicare-aged patients, successful AF ablation significantly reduced AF-related medical costs over 12 months, though overall costs did not differ significantly from failed ablations.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Similar overall costs after successful or failed AF ablation in Medicare patients; hypothesis-generating for AF-related savings and requires randomized confirmation.
INTRODUCTION: This retrospective cohort study compared the direct medical costs of successful versus unsuccessful catheter ablation in Medicare-aged patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), using medical claims data. METHODS: AF patients with > or = 12 months of continuous medical/pharmacy coverage pre- and postablation were identified from the MarketScan Medicare database (January 2003 to December 2006). For study inclusion, patients were required to have > or = 2 AF inpatient/outpatient visits within 6 months and to have received antiarrhythmic drug therapy within 12 months prior to the index ablation. Ablation success was defined as the absence of antiarrhythmic drug therapy 6-12 months postablation. RESULTS: Of 135 patients identified (67% men, mean age 73 years), ablation was successful in 69 (51.1%); most patients (96%) underwent a single procedure. Patients with successful ablation discontinued antiarrhythmic drug treatment after (mean) 54 days. Use of rate-control and anticoagulant drugs decreased after successful ablation, from 87% to 67% and from 86% to 64% of patients, respectively. Among failed ablation patients, 74% versus 70% received rate-control drugs, and 88% versus 82% received anticoagulants pre- versus postablation. Mean +/- SD per-patient procedural costs were $13,655+/-$12,761 for successful compared with $17,294+/-$26,502 (P=0.21) for failed ablation, while AF-related medical costs over 12 months postablation were $2394+/-$642 and $2703+/-$1706, respectively (P<0.001). Overall costs tended to be lower for successful ($16,049+/-$12,536) than for failed ($19,997+/-$13,958) AF ablation (P=0.07). These findings are subject to the limitations imposed by a retrospective database analysis and a small sample size. CONCLUSION: Outside the clinical-trial setting, catheter ablation for second-line treatment of AF proved unsuccessful in half of Medicare-aged patients. Direct medical costs did not differ significantly between patients with failed and successful ablations. The high rate and costs of AF ablation failure in the Medicare-aged population reinforce the need for better understanding of prognostic factors for ablation outcome.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lin et al. (2010) conducted a cohort in Atrial fibrillation (n=135). Successful catheter ablation vs. Failed catheter ablation was evaluated on Overall direct medical costs over 12 months postablation (p=0.07). Overall direct medical costs over 12 months did not differ between Medicare-aged patients with successful versus failed atrial fibrillation ablation.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: