Cost-Effectiveness of Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty Compared With Conventional Balloon Angioplasty for Arteriovenous Access Flow Dysfunction

Chin Cheung Andrew Lau,Farah Irani,Luming Shi,Ankur Patel,Kun Da Zhuang,Sivanathan Chandramohan,Bien Soo Tan,Tze Tec Chong,Chieh Suai Tan,Kiang Hiong Tay

doi:10.1016/j.vhri.2022.05.002

Abstract

ObjectivesThis study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty compared with conventional balloon angioplasty (cPTA) in patients with arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) and arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) dysfunction from a Singapore healthcare perspective. MethodsExisting cost-effectiveness studies comparing DCB and cPTA have not incorporated AVF/AVG abandonment costs. This Markov model-based economic evaluation incorporated AVF/AVG creation and maturation costs on top of routine intervention costs to model a hypothetical cohort of 60-year-old AVF/AVG flow dysfunction patients. Effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life-years. Cost-effectiveness was assessed using incremental net monetary benefit (NMB) at a Singapore willingness-to-pay threshold of Singapore dollar (S$)87 000. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to examine parameter uncertainty. To test hypotheses regarding cost-effectiveness, intervention counts per patient, cumulative incidence functions of AVF/AVG abandonment, and survival curves of death were compared between DCB and cPTA. ResultsDCB was not cost-effective at 3-year horizon (NMB = −S$1424), but was cost-effective at 1- and 6-year horizons (NMB = S$356 and S$3738, respectively). At 3 years, there was a 34.5% probability of DCB being cost-effective, but at 1- and 6-year horizons there was, respectively, 58.6% and 59.9% probability of DCB being cost-effective. DCB had graphically less AVF/AVG-abandonments, but this was not statistically significant (P = .21). Differences in other parameters were neither graphically nor statistically significant. ConclusionsWith AVF/AVG abandonment considered, DCB may be weakly cost-effective compared with cPTA in treating AVF/AVG flow dysfunction. AV access creation and maturation costs could have important explanatory value in assessing DCB cost-effectiveness.

Full Text