Cost-effectiveness of two endovascular treatment strategies vs intravenous thrombolysis

J. C. Bouvy, P. S S Fransen, S. A. Baeten, M. A. Koopmanschap, Louis Niessen, D. W J Dippel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of endovascular treatment against intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) when varying assumptions concerning its effectiveness. Methods: We developed a health economic model including a hypothetical population consisting of patients with ischemic stroke, admitted within 4.5 h from onset, without contraindications for IVT or intra-arterial treatment (IAT). A decision tree and life table were used to assess 6-month and lifetime costs (in Euros) and effects in quality-adjusted life years treatment with IVT alone, IAT alone, and IVT followed by IAT if the patient did not respond to treatment. Several analyses were performed to explore the impact of considerable uncertainty concerning the clinical effectiveness of endovascular treatment. Results: Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated a 54% probability of positive incremental lifetime effectiveness of IVT-IAT vs IVT alone. Sensitivity analyses showed significant variation in outcomes and cost-effectiveness of the included treatment strategies at different model assumptions. Conclusions: Acceptable cost-effectiveness of IVT-IAT compared to IVT will only be possible if recanalization rates are sufficiently high (>50%), treatment costs of IVT-IAT do not increase, and complication rates remain similar to those reported in the few randomized studies published to date. Large randomized studies are needed to reduce the uncertainty concerning the effects of endovascular treatment.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)351-359
Number of pages9
JournalActa Neurologica Scandinavica
Volume127
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2013

Fingerprint

Cost-Benefit Analysis
Therapeutics
Uncertainty
Economic Models
Decision Trees
Life Tables
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Health Care Costs
Stroke
Costs and Cost Analysis
Health

Keywords

  • Cerebrovascular disease
  • Cost-effectiveness analysis
  • Economic modeling
  • Stroke

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Neurology

Cite this

Bouvy, J. C., Fransen, P. S. S., Baeten, S. A., Koopmanschap, M. A., Niessen, L., & Dippel, D. W. J. (2013). Cost-effectiveness of two endovascular treatment strategies vs intravenous thrombolysis. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, 127(5), 351-359. https://doi.org/10.1111/ane.12065

Cost-effectiveness of two endovascular treatment strategies vs intravenous thrombolysis. / Bouvy, J. C.; Fransen, P. S S; Baeten, S. A.; Koopmanschap, M. A.; Niessen, Louis; Dippel, D. W J.

In: Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, Vol. 127, No. 5, 05.2013, p. 351-359.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Bouvy, JC, Fransen, PSS, Baeten, SA, Koopmanschap, MA, Niessen, L & Dippel, DWJ 2013, 'Cost-effectiveness of two endovascular treatment strategies vs intravenous thrombolysis', Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, vol. 127, no. 5, pp. 351-359. https://doi.org/10.1111/ane.12065
Bouvy, J. C. ; Fransen, P. S S ; Baeten, S. A. ; Koopmanschap, M. A. ; Niessen, Louis ; Dippel, D. W J. / Cost-effectiveness of two endovascular treatment strategies vs intravenous thrombolysis. In: Acta Neurologica Scandinavica. 2013 ; Vol. 127, No. 5. pp. 351-359.
@article{6e3955fa08df4426b87e8f1bf0aa2721,
title = "Cost-effectiveness of two endovascular treatment strategies vs intravenous thrombolysis",
abstract = "Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of endovascular treatment against intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) when varying assumptions concerning its effectiveness. Methods: We developed a health economic model including a hypothetical population consisting of patients with ischemic stroke, admitted within 4.5 h from onset, without contraindications for IVT or intra-arterial treatment (IAT). A decision tree and life table were used to assess 6-month and lifetime costs (in Euros) and effects in quality-adjusted life years treatment with IVT alone, IAT alone, and IVT followed by IAT if the patient did not respond to treatment. Several analyses were performed to explore the impact of considerable uncertainty concerning the clinical effectiveness of endovascular treatment. Results: Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated a 54{\%} probability of positive incremental lifetime effectiveness of IVT-IAT vs IVT alone. Sensitivity analyses showed significant variation in outcomes and cost-effectiveness of the included treatment strategies at different model assumptions. Conclusions: Acceptable cost-effectiveness of IVT-IAT compared to IVT will only be possible if recanalization rates are sufficiently high (>50{\%}), treatment costs of IVT-IAT do not increase, and complication rates remain similar to those reported in the few randomized studies published to date. Large randomized studies are needed to reduce the uncertainty concerning the effects of endovascular treatment.",
keywords = "Cerebrovascular disease, Cost-effectiveness analysis, Economic modeling, Stroke",
author = "Bouvy, {J. C.} and Fransen, {P. S S} and Baeten, {S. A.} and Koopmanschap, {M. A.} and Louis Niessen and Dippel, {D. W J}",
year = "2013",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1111/ane.12065",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "127",
pages = "351--359",
journal = "Acta Neurologica Scandinavica",
issn = "0001-6314",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness of two endovascular treatment strategies vs intravenous thrombolysis

AU - Bouvy, J. C.

AU - Fransen, P. S S

AU - Baeten, S. A.

AU - Koopmanschap, M. A.

AU - Niessen, Louis

AU - Dippel, D. W J

PY - 2013/5

Y1 - 2013/5

N2 - Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of endovascular treatment against intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) when varying assumptions concerning its effectiveness. Methods: We developed a health economic model including a hypothetical population consisting of patients with ischemic stroke, admitted within 4.5 h from onset, without contraindications for IVT or intra-arterial treatment (IAT). A decision tree and life table were used to assess 6-month and lifetime costs (in Euros) and effects in quality-adjusted life years treatment with IVT alone, IAT alone, and IVT followed by IAT if the patient did not respond to treatment. Several analyses were performed to explore the impact of considerable uncertainty concerning the clinical effectiveness of endovascular treatment. Results: Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated a 54% probability of positive incremental lifetime effectiveness of IVT-IAT vs IVT alone. Sensitivity analyses showed significant variation in outcomes and cost-effectiveness of the included treatment strategies at different model assumptions. Conclusions: Acceptable cost-effectiveness of IVT-IAT compared to IVT will only be possible if recanalization rates are sufficiently high (>50%), treatment costs of IVT-IAT do not increase, and complication rates remain similar to those reported in the few randomized studies published to date. Large randomized studies are needed to reduce the uncertainty concerning the effects of endovascular treatment.

AB - Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of endovascular treatment against intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) when varying assumptions concerning its effectiveness. Methods: We developed a health economic model including a hypothetical population consisting of patients with ischemic stroke, admitted within 4.5 h from onset, without contraindications for IVT or intra-arterial treatment (IAT). A decision tree and life table were used to assess 6-month and lifetime costs (in Euros) and effects in quality-adjusted life years treatment with IVT alone, IAT alone, and IVT followed by IAT if the patient did not respond to treatment. Several analyses were performed to explore the impact of considerable uncertainty concerning the clinical effectiveness of endovascular treatment. Results: Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated a 54% probability of positive incremental lifetime effectiveness of IVT-IAT vs IVT alone. Sensitivity analyses showed significant variation in outcomes and cost-effectiveness of the included treatment strategies at different model assumptions. Conclusions: Acceptable cost-effectiveness of IVT-IAT compared to IVT will only be possible if recanalization rates are sufficiently high (>50%), treatment costs of IVT-IAT do not increase, and complication rates remain similar to those reported in the few randomized studies published to date. Large randomized studies are needed to reduce the uncertainty concerning the effects of endovascular treatment.

KW - Cerebrovascular disease

KW - Cost-effectiveness analysis

KW - Economic modeling

KW - Stroke

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84878366459&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84878366459&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/ane.12065

DO - 10.1111/ane.12065

M3 - Article

VL - 127

SP - 351

EP - 359

JO - Acta Neurologica Scandinavica

JF - Acta Neurologica Scandinavica

SN - 0001-6314

IS - 5

ER -