Cost-effectiveness of conventional and endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: results of a randomized trial.

Fulltext:
53719.pdf
Embargo:
until further notice
Size:
483.0Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
publisher's version
Publication year
2007Source
Journal of Vascular Surgery, 46, 5, (2007), pp. 883-890ISSN
Publication type
Article / Letter to editor

Display more detailsDisplay less details
Organization
Surgery
Radboudumc Extern
Journal title
Journal of Vascular Surgery
Volume
vol. 46
Issue
iss. 5
Page start
p. 883
Page end
p. 890
Subject
NCEBP 14: Cardiovascular diseases; UMCN 2.1: Heart, lung and circulationAbstract
BACKGROUND: Two randomized trials have shown similar mid-term outcomes for survival and quality of life after endovascular and conventional open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). With reduced hospital and intensive care stay, endovascular repair has been hypothesized to be more efficient than open repair. The Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management (DREAM) trial was undertaken to assess the balance of costs and effects of endovascular vs open aneurysm repair. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized trial comparing endovascular repair with open repair in 351 patients with an AAA and studied costs, cost-effectiveness, and clinical outcome 1 year after surgery. In addition to clinical outcome, costs and quality of life were recorded up to 1 year in 170 patients in the endovascular repair group and in 170 in the open repair group. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were estimated for cost per life-year, event-free life-year, and quality adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Uncertainty regarding these outcomes was assessed using bootstrapping. RESULTS: Patients in the endovascular repair group experienced 0.72 QALY vs 0.73 in the open repair group (absolute difference, 0.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.038 to 0.058). Endovascular repair was associated with additional euro 4293 direct costs (euro 18,179 vs euro 13.886; 95% CI, euro 2,770 to euro 5,830). Most of the bootstrap estimates indicated that endovascular repair resulted in slightly longer overall and event-free survival associated with respective incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of euro76,100 and euro 171,500 per year gained. Open repair appeared the dominant strategy in costs per QALY. CONCLUSION: Presently, routine use of endovascular repair in patients also eligible for open repair does not result in a QALY gain at 1 year postoperatively, provides only a marginal overall survival benefit, and is associated with a substantial, if not prohibitive, increase in costs.
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
- Academic publications [205104]
- Electronic publications [103316]
- Faculty of Medical Sciences [81055]
Upload full text
Use your RU credentials (u/z-number and password) to log in with SURFconext to upload a file for processing by the repository team.