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

21 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

VL - 9

SP - 2343

EP - 2352

JO - JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions

JF - JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions

SN - 1936-8798

IS - 22

ER -