Cost-Effectiveness analysis of endovascular versus open repair in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm in Iran: A Cross-Sectional study.

Abstract

Abdominal aortic aneurysm is one of the most important cardiovascular diseases, especially in the elderly. People with this disease are at risk of rupture of the abdominal aorta and death. The present study was conducted with the aim of analyzing the cost effectiveness of endovascular repair compared to open surgery in abdominal aortic aneurysm patients in Iran. A Markov chain model was developed based on the use of endovascular repair and open surgery. The base-case patient was defined as a 65-year-old man presenting with abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter greater than 5cm. The determination of costs was from the perspective of the public sector provider. QALY was used to calculate the effectiveness. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and TreeAge software were used for cost-effectiveness analysis. The follow-up period was 10 years and the willingness to pay (WTP) was determined as three times the Gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. At the end of year 10, the endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) strategy gained 1,318,313,559 Iranian Rial (IRR) (67885.29$) in cost and 3.57 QALYs in effectiveness. In contrast, the use of the open surgery repair (OSR) strategy gained 1,186,761,858 IRR (61111.16$) in cost and 3·32 QALYs in effectiveness. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, comparing EVAR versus OSR, was 53, 346, 3757 IRR (178.36$) per QALYs, which is lower than the proposed WTP, indicating that EVAR is more expensive and more effective. Based on the Monte Carlo simulation test, EVAR is the preferred strategy in 58.6% of the population. Endovascular repair has a relative superiority compared to open surgery, and the probability of the effectiveness of endovascular repair compared to open surgery does not change with increasing willingness to pay.