- Recent studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). The cost-effectiveness of this practice is unknown.
A Markov state-transition decision analytic model accounting for varying procedural efficacy rates, complication rates, and cost estimates was developed to compare DCB angioplasty with drug-eluting stent (DES) placement in patients with bare-metal stent (BMS)-ISR. Data on procedural outcomes associated with both treatment strategies were derived from the literature, and the cost analysis was conducted from a health care payer perspective. Effectiveness was expressed as life-years gained.
In the base-case analysis, initial procedure costs amounted to a,not sign3,604.14 for DCB angioplasty and to a,not sign3,309.66 for DES implantation. Over a 12-month time horizon, the DCB strategy was found to be less costly (a,not sign4,130.38 vs. a,not sign5,305.30) and slightly more effective in terms of life expectancy (0.983 vs. 0.976 years)Recent studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). The cost-effectiveness of this practice is unknown.
A Markov state-transition decision analytic model accounting for varying procedural efficacy rates, complication rates, and cost estimates was developed to compare DCB angioplasty with drug-eluting stent (DES) placement in patients with bare-metal stent (BMS)-ISR. Data on procedural outcomes associated with both treatment strategies were derived from the literature, and the cost analysis was conducted from a health care payer perspective. Effectiveness was expressed as life-years gained.
In the base-case analysis, initial procedure costs amounted to a,not sign3,604.14 for DCB angioplasty and to a,not sign3,309.66 for DES implantation. Over a 12-month time horizon, the DCB strategy was found to be less costly (a,not sign4,130.38 vs. a,not sign5,305.30) and slightly more effective in terms of life expectancy (0.983 vs. 0.976 years) than the DES strategy. Extensive sensitivity analyses indicated that, in comparison with DES implantation, the cost advantage of the DCB strategy was robust to clinically plausible variations in the values of key model input parameters. The variables with the greatest impact on base-case results were the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy with acetylsalicylic acid and clopidogrel after DCB angioplasty, the use of generic clopidogrel, and variations in the costs associated with the DCB device.
DCB angioplasty is a cost-effective treatment option for coronary BMS-ISR. The higher initial costs of DCB are more than offset by later cost-savings, predominantly as a result of reduced medication costs.…
