SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.5 issue1Ischemic postconditioning fails to reduce infarct size in pig models of intermediate and prolonged ischemiaPlaque modification techniques to treat calcified coronary lesions. Position paper from the ACI-SEC author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • Have no similar articlesSimilars in SciELO
  • On index processSimilars in Google

Share


REC: Interventional Cardiology

On-line version ISSN 2604-7276Print version ISSN 2604-7306

Abstract

VAZQUEZ RODRIGUEZ, José Manuel et al. Cost-effectiveness of SAPIEN 3 transcatheter aortic valve implantation in low surgical mortality risk patients in Spain. REC Interv Cardiol ES [online]. 2023, vol.5, n.1, pp.38-45.  Epub Mar 18, 2024. ISSN 2604-7276.  https://dx.doi.org/10.24875/recic.m22000337.

Introduction and objectives:

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) was first introduced in 2007 as an alternative to open heart surgery to treat patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (sSAS) with various indication expansions since that date. Recently, the PARTNER 3 study (Placement of aortic transcatheter valve) demonstrated clinical benefits with TAVI with the SAPIEN 3 valve vs surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in selected low surgical mortality risk patients. We reviewed data from the PARTNER 3 and economic data from Spain to assess the cost-effectiveness ratio of TAVI vs SAVR in patients with sSAS and low surgical mortality risk.

Methods:

A 2-stage model was used to estimate direct healthcare costs and health-related quality of life data regarding TAVI with the SAPIEN 3 valve and SAVR. Early adverse events associated with TAVI from the PARTNER 3 were fed into a Markov model that captured longer-term outcomes after TAVI or SAVR.

Results:

TAVI with SAPIEN 3 improved quality-adjusted life years per patient (+ 1.00) with an increase in costs vs SAVR (€6971 per patient). This meant an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio/quality-adjusted life year of €6952 per patient. The results were robust with TAVI with the SAPIEN 3 valve remaining cost-effective across several sensitivity analyses.

Conclusions:

TAVI with the SAPIEN 3 valve is cost effective compared to SAVR in patients with sSAS and low surgical mortality risk. These findings can inform policymakers to facilitate policy development in Spain on intervention selection in this patient population.

Keywords : Spain; Transcatheter aortic valve replacement; Heart procedures and surgeries; Prosthetic heart valve; Surgical aortic valve replacement; Cost-benefit analysis; Cost-effectiveness analysis; Aortic stenosis; Low-risk.

        · abstract in Spanish     · text in English | Spanish     · English ( pdf ) | Spanish ( pdf )