Economic Analysis of Catheter‐Directed Thrombolysis for Intermediate‐Risk Pulmonary Embolism

Elina Pliakos,Lauren Glassmoyer,Taisei Kobayashi,Steven Pugliese,Hari Shankar,William Matthai,Sameer Khandhar,Jay Giri,Ashwin Nathan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.31280
IF: 2.3
2024-11-23
Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
Abstract:Background Pulmonary embolism is associated with a significant burden of morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. Catheter‐directed thrombolysis has emerged as a promising option for patients with intermediate‐risk pulmonary embolism which aims to improve outcomes over standard anticoagulation. Methods We constructed a decision‐analytic model comparing the cost‐effectiveness of catheter‐directed thrombolysis to anticoagulation alone for the management of intermediate‐risk pulmonary embolism. Cost‐effectiveness was determined by calculating deaths averted and incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios (ICER). Uncertainty was addressed by plotting cost‐effectiveness planes and acceptability curves for various willingness‐to‐pay thresholds. The main outcome was ICER (US dollars/deaths averted). Results In the base case analysis, derived using systemic lysis data, the cost associated with catheter‐directed thrombolysis was estimated at 25,060, and the probability of survival at 1 month was 0.958. Overall, catheter‐directed thrombolysis resulted in savings of 104,089 per death averted). Sensitivity analysis revealed that catheter‐directed thrombolysis would no longer be cost‐effective when its associated mortality is greater than 0.042. In the probabilistic analysis, at a willingness‐to‐pay of ‐ 0 to $100,000. Conclusions If the assumptions made in our model are shown to be accurate then CDT would be cost‐effective and may lead to considerable cost savings if used where clinically appropriate.
cardiac & cardiovascular systems
What problem does this paper attempt to address?