Healthcare utilization and outcomes in atrial fibrillation patients treated by drug therapy versus a catheter ablation strategy

Abstract

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background and Aims Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most prevalent arrhythmia, associated with increased mortality and morbidity and causing relevant costs. Treatment options consist of catheter ablation (PVI) and rate or rhythm control drugs (non-PVI). Methods We analyze inpatient and outpatient data from the Upper Austrian Health Insurance Fund. Data of patients with a first hospitalization for AF in the years 2005 to 2018 were examined, using propensity score matching (PSM) including all CHA2DS2-VASc variables and working collar. Results Out of 21,791 AF patients, PSM identified 1,013 well-matching pairs (PVI and non-PVI). Over a ten-year period, the PVI treatment strategy group reveals significantly higher inpatient and outpatient expenditures (€2,200/year). Positive economic effects can be demonstrated by a 5.1 percentage points (pp) higher employment rate and fewer retirements (7.6pp). Utmost important is the 5.8pp all-cause mortality reduction over 10 years in the PVI treatment strategy. Conclusions A PVI based treatment strategy results in higher healthcare expenditures vs. drug therapy alone. Most of these higher costs are caused by the PVI procedures during this period. Thus, more effective and efficient methods are needed to further reduce costs for the intervention and prevent repeat procedures. The benefit of a PVI treatment strategy is seen in higher employment rates, which is crucial from a societal perspective and should be a strong argument for caregivers. We show a significant reduction in all-cause mortality, which we partly attribute to the PVI procedure itself, to a stricter risk factor assessment and treatment, and a tighter medical adherence.