Cost-Effectiveness of Endovascular Femoropopliteal Intervention Using Drug-Coated Balloons Versus Standard Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty: Results From the IN.PACT SFA II Trial

Adam C. Salisbury, Haiyan Li, Katherine R. Vilain, Michael R. Jaff, Peter A. Schneider, John R. Laird, David J. Cohen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty versus standard percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA). Background Recent trials have reported lower rates of target lesion revascularization with DCB angioplasty versus standard PTA. However, the cost-effectiveness of DCB angioplasty is unknown. Methods A prospective economic study was performed alongside the IN.PACT SFA II (IN.PACT Admiral Drug-Coated Balloon vs. Standard Balloon Angioplasty for the Treatment of Superficial Femoral Artery [SFA] and Proximal Popliteal Artery [PPA]) trial, which randomized 181 patients with femoropopliteal disease to the IN.PACT DCB versus standard PTA. Resource use data were collected over 2-year follow-up, and costs were assigned using resource-based accounting and billing data. Health utilities were assessed using the EuroQol 5-dimensions questionnaire. Cost-effectiveness was assessed as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained using a decision-analytic model on the basis of empirical data from the trial assuming identical long-term mortality. Results Initial costs were $1,129 per patient higher with DCB angioplasty than standard PTA, driven by higher costs for the DCB itself. Between discharge and 24 months, target limb–related costs were $1,212 per patient lower with DCB angioplasty such that discounted 2-year costs were similar for the 2 groups ($11,277 vs. $11,359, p = 0.97), whereas QALYs tended to be greater among patients treated with DCBs (1.53 ± 0.44 vs. 1.47 ± 0.42, p = 0.40). The probability that DCB angioplasty is cost-effective compared with standard PTA was 70% using a threshold of $50,000 per QALY gained and 79% at a threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained. Conclusions For patients with femoropopliteal disease, DCB angioplasty is associated with better 2-year outcomes and similar target limb–related costs compared with standard PTA. Formal cost-effectiveness analysis on the basis of these results suggests that use of the DCB angioplasty is likely to be economically attractive.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2343-2352
Number of pages10
JournalJACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
Volume9
Issue number22
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 28 2016

Fingerprint

Balloon Angioplasty
Angioplasty
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Costs and Cost Analysis
Femoral Artery
Popliteal Artery
Drug Costs
Economics
Prospective Studies
Mortality
Health

Keywords

  • angioplasty
  • cost-effectiveness
  • drug-coated balloon
  • femoropopliteal artery
  • peripheral arterial disease

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Cost-Effectiveness of Endovascular Femoropopliteal Intervention Using Drug-Coated Balloons Versus Standard Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty : Results From the IN.PACT SFA II Trial. / Salisbury, Adam C.; Li, Haiyan; Vilain, Katherine R.; Jaff, Michael R.; Schneider, Peter A.; Laird, John R.; Cohen, David J.

In: JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, Vol. 9, No. 22, 28.11.2016, p. 2343-2352.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Salisbury, Adam C. ; Li, Haiyan ; Vilain, Katherine R. ; Jaff, Michael R. ; Schneider, Peter A. ; Laird, John R. ; Cohen, David J. / Cost-Effectiveness of Endovascular Femoropopliteal Intervention Using Drug-Coated Balloons Versus Standard Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty : Results From the IN.PACT SFA II Trial. In: JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions. 2016 ; Vol. 9, No. 22. pp. 2343-2352.
@article{7f9fb407d260479daa5512de761834b4,
title = "Cost-Effectiveness of Endovascular Femoropopliteal Intervention Using Drug-Coated Balloons Versus Standard Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty: Results From the IN.PACT SFA II Trial",
abstract = "Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty versus standard percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA). Background Recent trials have reported lower rates of target lesion revascularization with DCB angioplasty versus standard PTA. However, the cost-effectiveness of DCB angioplasty is unknown. Methods A prospective economic study was performed alongside the IN.PACT SFA II (IN.PACT Admiral Drug-Coated Balloon vs. Standard Balloon Angioplasty for the Treatment of Superficial Femoral Artery [SFA] and Proximal Popliteal Artery [PPA]) trial, which randomized 181 patients with femoropopliteal disease to the IN.PACT DCB versus standard PTA. Resource use data were collected over 2-year follow-up, and costs were assigned using resource-based accounting and billing data. Health utilities were assessed using the EuroQol 5-dimensions questionnaire. Cost-effectiveness was assessed as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained using a decision-analytic model on the basis of empirical data from the trial assuming identical long-term mortality. Results Initial costs were $1,129 per patient higher with DCB angioplasty than standard PTA, driven by higher costs for the DCB itself. Between discharge and 24 months, target limb–related costs were $1,212 per patient lower with DCB angioplasty such that discounted 2-year costs were similar for the 2 groups ($11,277 vs. $11,359, p = 0.97), whereas QALYs tended to be greater among patients treated with DCBs (1.53 ± 0.44 vs. 1.47 ± 0.42, p = 0.40). The probability that DCB angioplasty is cost-effective compared with standard PTA was 70{\%} using a threshold of $50,000 per QALY gained and 79{\%} at a threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained. Conclusions For patients with femoropopliteal disease, DCB angioplasty is associated with better 2-year outcomes and similar target limb–related costs compared with standard PTA. Formal cost-effectiveness analysis on the basis of these results suggests that use of the DCB angioplasty is likely to be economically attractive.",
keywords = "angioplasty, cost-effectiveness, drug-coated balloon, femoropopliteal artery, peripheral arterial disease",
author = "Salisbury, {Adam C.} and Haiyan Li and Vilain, {Katherine R.} and Jaff, {Michael R.} and Schneider, {Peter A.} and Laird, {John R.} and Cohen, {David J.}",
year = "2016",
month = "11",
day = "28",
doi = "10.1016/j.jcin.2016.08.036",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "9",
pages = "2343--2352",
journal = "JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions",
issn = "1936-8798",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "22",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-Effectiveness of Endovascular Femoropopliteal Intervention Using Drug-Coated Balloons Versus Standard Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty

T2 - Results From the IN.PACT SFA II Trial

AU - Salisbury, Adam C.

AU - Li, Haiyan

AU - Vilain, Katherine R.

AU - Jaff, Michael R.

AU - Schneider, Peter A.

AU - Laird, John R.

AU - Cohen, David J.

PY - 2016/11/28

Y1 - 2016/11/28

N2 - Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty versus standard percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA). Background Recent trials have reported lower rates of target lesion revascularization with DCB angioplasty versus standard PTA. However, the cost-effectiveness of DCB angioplasty is unknown. Methods A prospective economic study was performed alongside the IN.PACT SFA II (IN.PACT Admiral Drug-Coated Balloon vs. Standard Balloon Angioplasty for the Treatment of Superficial Femoral Artery [SFA] and Proximal Popliteal Artery [PPA]) trial, which randomized 181 patients with femoropopliteal disease to the IN.PACT DCB versus standard PTA. Resource use data were collected over 2-year follow-up, and costs were assigned using resource-based accounting and billing data. Health utilities were assessed using the EuroQol 5-dimensions questionnaire. Cost-effectiveness was assessed as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained using a decision-analytic model on the basis of empirical data from the trial assuming identical long-term mortality. Results Initial costs were $1,129 per patient higher with DCB angioplasty than standard PTA, driven by higher costs for the DCB itself. Between discharge and 24 months, target limb–related costs were $1,212 per patient lower with DCB angioplasty such that discounted 2-year costs were similar for the 2 groups ($11,277 vs. $11,359, p = 0.97), whereas QALYs tended to be greater among patients treated with DCBs (1.53 ± 0.44 vs. 1.47 ± 0.42, p = 0.40). The probability that DCB angioplasty is cost-effective compared with standard PTA was 70% using a threshold of $50,000 per QALY gained and 79% at a threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained. Conclusions For patients with femoropopliteal disease, DCB angioplasty is associated with better 2-year outcomes and similar target limb–related costs compared with standard PTA. Formal cost-effectiveness analysis on the basis of these results suggests that use of the DCB angioplasty is likely to be economically attractive.

AB - Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty versus standard percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA). Background Recent trials have reported lower rates of target lesion revascularization with DCB angioplasty versus standard PTA. However, the cost-effectiveness of DCB angioplasty is unknown. Methods A prospective economic study was performed alongside the IN.PACT SFA II (IN.PACT Admiral Drug-Coated Balloon vs. Standard Balloon Angioplasty for the Treatment of Superficial Femoral Artery [SFA] and Proximal Popliteal Artery [PPA]) trial, which randomized 181 patients with femoropopliteal disease to the IN.PACT DCB versus standard PTA. Resource use data were collected over 2-year follow-up, and costs were assigned using resource-based accounting and billing data. Health utilities were assessed using the EuroQol 5-dimensions questionnaire. Cost-effectiveness was assessed as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained using a decision-analytic model on the basis of empirical data from the trial assuming identical long-term mortality. Results Initial costs were $1,129 per patient higher with DCB angioplasty than standard PTA, driven by higher costs for the DCB itself. Between discharge and 24 months, target limb–related costs were $1,212 per patient lower with DCB angioplasty such that discounted 2-year costs were similar for the 2 groups ($11,277 vs. $11,359, p = 0.97), whereas QALYs tended to be greater among patients treated with DCBs (1.53 ± 0.44 vs. 1.47 ± 0.42, p = 0.40). The probability that DCB angioplasty is cost-effective compared with standard PTA was 70% using a threshold of $50,000 per QALY gained and 79% at a threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained. Conclusions For patients with femoropopliteal disease, DCB angioplasty is associated with better 2-year outcomes and similar target limb–related costs compared with standard PTA. Formal cost-effectiveness analysis on the basis of these results suggests that use of the DCB angioplasty is likely to be economically attractive.

KW - angioplasty

KW - cost-effectiveness

KW - drug-coated balloon

KW - femoropopliteal artery

KW - peripheral arterial disease

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84997079068&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84997079068&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.08.036

DO - 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.08.036

M3 - Article

C2 - 27884360

AN - SCOPUS:84997079068

VL - 9

SP - 2343

EP - 2352

JO - JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions

JF - JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions

SN - 1936-8798

IS - 22

ER -