Cost-effectiveness of combined catheter ablation and left atrial appendage closure for symptomatic atrial fibrillation in patients with high stroke and bleeding risk

Cost-effectiveness of left atrial appendage closure for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: a systematic review appraising the methodological quality

BACKGROUND

The increasing global prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) has led to a growing demand for stroke prevention strategies, resulting in higher healthcare costs. High-quality economic evaluations of stroke prevention strategies can play a crucial role in maximising efficient allocation of resources. In this systematic review, we assessed the methodological quality of such economic evaluations.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases of PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Econ Lit to identify model-based economic evaluations comparing the left atrial appendage closure procedure (LAAC) and oral anticoagulants published in English since 2000. Data on study characteristics, model-based details, and analyses were collected. The methodological quality was evaluated using the modified Economic Evaluations Bias (ECOBIAS) checklist. For each of the 22 biases listed in this checklist, studies were categorised into one of four groups: low risk, partial risk, high risk due to inadequate reporting, or high risk. To gauge the overall quality of each study, we computed a composite score by assigning + 2, 0, - 1 and - 2 to each risk category, respectively.

RESULTS

In our analysis of 12 studies, majority adopted a healthcare provider or payer perspective and employed Markov Models with the number of health states varying from 6 to 16. Cost-effectiveness results varied across studies. LAAC displayed a probability exceeding 50% of being the cost-effective option in six out of nine evaluations compared to warfarin, six out of eight evaluations when compared to dabigatran, in three out of five evaluations against apixaban, and in two out of three studies compared to rivaroxaban. The methodological quality scores for individual studies ranged from 10 to - 12 out of a possible 24. Most high-risk ratings were due to inadequate reporting, which was prevalent across various biases, including those related to data identification, baseline data, treatment effects, and data incorporation. Cost measurement omission bias and inefficient comparator bias were also common.

CONCLUSIONS

While most studies concluded LAAC to be the cost-effective strategy for stroke prevention in AF, shortcomings in methodological quality raise concerns about reliability and validity of results. Future evaluations, free of these shortcomings, can yield stronger policy evidence.

Cost Effectiveness of Strategies to Manage Atrial Fibrillation in Middle- and High-Income Countries: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) remains the most common form of cardiac arrhythmia. Management of AF aims to reduce the risk of stroke, heart failure and premature mortality via rate or rhythm control. This study aimed to review the literature on the cost effectiveness of treatment strategies to manage AF among adults living in low-, middle- and high-income countries.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE (OvidSp), Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EconLit and Google Scholar for relevant studies between September 2022 and November 2022. The search strategy involved medical subject headings or related text words. Data management and selection was performed using EndNote library. The titles and abstracts were screened followed by eligibility assessment of full texts. Selection, assessment of the risk of bias within the studies, and data extraction were conducted by two independent reviewers. The cost-effectiveness results were synthesised narratively. The analysis was performed using Microsoft Excel 365. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio for each study was adjusted to 2021 USD values.

RESULTS

Fifty studies were included in the analysis after selection and risk of bias assessment. In high-income countries, apixaban was predominantly cost effective for stroke prevention in patients at low and moderate risk of stroke, while left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) was cost effective in patients at high risk of stroke. Propranolol was the cost-effective choice for rate control, while catheter ablation and the convergent procedure were cost-effective strategies in patients with paroxysmal and persistent AF, respectively. Among the anti-arrhythmic drugs, sotalol was the cost-effective strategy for rhythm control. In middle-income countries, apixaban was the cost-effective choice for stroke prevention in patients at low and moderate risk of stroke while high-dose edoxaban was cost effective in patients at high risk of stroke. Radiofrequency catheter ablation was the cost-effective option in rhythm control. No data were available for low-income countries.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review has shown that there are several cost-effective strategies to manage AF in different resource settings. However, the decision to use any strategy should be guided by objective clinical and economic evidence supported by sound clinical judgement.

REGISTRATION

CRD42022360590.

Sex Differences in the Combined Ablation and Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Results From LAACablation Registry

Background

More than 40% of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) procedures were combined with atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation in China.

Objectives

This study aimed to assess the sex differences in the combined radiofrequency catheter ablation and LAAC procedures.

Methods

Data from the LAACablation (Left Atrial Appendage Closure in Combination With Catheter Ablation) registry, which enrolled AF patients who underwent the combined procedure between 2018 and 2021, were analyzed. Procedural complications, long-term outcomes, and quality of life (QoL) were compared between sexes.

Results

Of 931 patients, 402 (43.2%) were women. Compared with men, women were older (age 71.3 ± 7.4 years vs 68.7 ± 8.1 years; P < 0.001), presented more often with paroxysmal AF (52.5% vs 42.7%; P < 0.003), and had higher CHA₂DS₂-VASc scores (4.1 ± 1.5 vs 3.1 ± 1.5; P < 0.001), but received less often linear ablation and had shorter total procedural times and radiofrequency catheter ablation times. Women had similar rates of total and major procedural complications but presented with a higher incidence of minor complications than men (3.7% vs 1.3%; P = 0.027). Follow-up over 1,812 patient-years revealed similar adverse events between women and men, including all-cause death (HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.43-1.85; P = 0.754), thromboembolic events (HR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.54-2.52; P = 0.697), major bleeding (HR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.38-2.44; P = 0.935), and their composite (HR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.56-1.28; P = 0.434). The recurrence rates of atrial tachyarrhythmia were also comparable between sexes presenting either paroxysmal or persistent AF. Women were seen with greater QoL impairment at baseline, but the sex gap narrowed at 1-year follow-up.

Conclusions

In AF patients who underwent the combined procedure, women had similar procedural safety and long-term efficacy to men and presented greater QoL improvement. (Left Atrial Appendage Closure in Combination With Catheter Ablation [LAACablation]; NCT03788941).

Cost-effectiveness of rhythm control strategy: Ablation versus antiarrhythmic drugs for treating atrial fibrillation in Korea based on real-world data

Background

Ablation-based treatment has emerged as an alternative rhythm control strategy for symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). Recent studies have demonstrated the cost-effectiveness of ablation compared with medical therapy in various circumstances. We assessed the economic comparison between ablation and medical therapy based on a nationwide real-world population.

Methods and findings

For 192,345 patients with new-onset AF (age ≥ 18 years) identified between August 2015 and July 2018 from the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA) database, medical resource use data were collected to compare AF patients that underwent ablation (N = 2,131) and those administered antiarrhythmic drugs (N = 8,048). Subsequently, a Markov chain Monte Carlo model was built. The patients had at least one risk factor for stroke, and the base-case used a 20-year time horizon, discounting at 4.5% annually. Transition probabilities and costs were estimated using the present data, and utilities were derived from literature review. The costs were converted to US $ (2019). Sensitivity analyses were performed using probabilistic and deterministic methods. The net costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) for antiarrhythmic drugs and ablation treatments were $37,421 and 8.8 QALYs and $39,820 and 9.3 QALYs, respectively. Compared with antiarrhythmic drugs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of ablation was $4,739/QALY, which is lower than the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $32,000/QALY.

Conclusion

In symptomatic AF patients with a stroke risk under the age of 75 years, ablation-based rhythm control is potentially a more economically attractive option compared with antiarrhythmic drug-based rhythm control in Korea.

Experience of Combined Procedure during Percutaneous LAA Closure

Introduction: Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an alternative to oral anticoagulants (OAC) in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and contraindication to long-term OAC. Combined strategy with percutaneous LAAC at the same time of other cardiac structural or electrophysiological procedures has emerged as an alternative to a staged strategy. Aim: To describe our experience with combined LAAC procedures using Watchman™ devices. Methods: All patients with combined LAAC procedures using Watchman™ (WN) devices performed from 2016 to 2021 were included. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of periprocedural complications and adverse events during the follow-up. The primary efficacy endpoint included strokes, systemic embolisms, major bleeding and cardiovascular death. Results: From 2016, among 160 patients who underwent LAAC using WN devices, 19 underwent a combined strategy: 7 transcatheter edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (TEMVR) (37%), 6 typical atrial flutter ablation (31%), 2 leadless pacemaker (LP) implantation (10%) and 4 AF ablation (22%). The WN device was successfully implanted in 98% and 100% of cases for single and combined LAAC procedures, respectively (p = 0.63). Median follow-up was 13 months (IQR 25/75 3/24). Device-related complications occurred in 6 out of 141 patients (4%) who underwent single LAAC and in no (0/19) patient in the combined LAAC procedure (p = ns). The procedural-related complications did not differ significantly between groups (5% vs. 10%, respectively, in the single and combined group, p = 0.1). Conclusion: Combined procedure using the Watchman™ devices and one other structural or electrophysiological procedure appears safe and effective. Larger series are needed to confirm these results.

Current evidence on the safety and efficacy of combined atrial fibrillation ablation and left atrial appendage closure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Combined atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation and left atrial (LA) appendage (LAA) closure (LAAC) has been practiced for management of both the symptoms and the high stroke risk of AF. The purpose of this review is to review recent evidence regarding the combined procedure.

RECENT FINDINGS

Newly acquired long-term data of combined AF ablation and LAAC supplied satisfactory evidence on the safety and efficacy of the combined procedure. Studies also showed LA structural remodeling following combined procedure was mainly affected by sinus rhythm status post catheter ablation, not by LAAC. A cost-effectiveness study revealed that combined procedure was a cost-effective therapeutic option in symptomatic AF patients with high stroke and bleeding risk. Due to recent evidence of high incidences of LAA thrombus formation after LAA electrical isolation (LAAEI) and benefit of LAAC after LAAEI, an extended combined procedure of standard AF ablation plus LAAEI and LAAC was considered as a potential therapeutic option for persistent AF patients with high stroke risk.

SUMMARY

In conclusion, combined AF ablation and LAAC serve as a promising option for patients with symptomatic AF and high risk of stroke and/or bleeding.

Actual management costs of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation treated with percutaneous left atrial appendage closure or oral anticoagulation

AIMS

Comparing actual management costs in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) treated with percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) or OAC only.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients undergoing percutaneous LAAC and AF patients treated with OAC only were matched for gender, age, and diagnosis related groups (DRG) clinical complexity level (CCL). Costs for cardiovascular outpatient clinic visits and hospitalizations were derived from the actual reimbursement records. Between 1/2012 and 12/2016, 8478 patients were referred: 7801 (92%) managed with OAC and 677 (8%) with percutaneous LAAC. Matching resulted in 558 patients (279 per group) for final analysis. Age was 74.9 ± 7.5 years, 244 were female (43.7%), and DRG CCL was 1.8 ± 1.1. Annualized management cost before percutaneous LAAC was € 3110 (IQR: € 1281-8127). After 4.5 ± 1.4 years follow-up, annualized management cost was € 1297 (IQR: € 607-2735) in OAC patients and € 1013 (IQR: € 0-4770) in patients after percutaneous LAAC (p = 0.003). Percutaneous LAAC was the strongest independent determinant to reduce follow-up costs (B = -0.8; CI: -1.09 ̶̶̶̶̶ -0.6; p < 0.0001). Estimated 3-year survival was 92% in percutaneous LAAC and 90% in OAC patients (p = 0.7).

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous LAAC significantly reduces management costs. Management costs are significantly higher for patients treated with only OAC compared to patients after percutaneous LAAC. In spite of their complex comorbid profile, percutaneous LAAC patients show a follow-up survival rate similar to patients solely treated with OAC. Future studies are necessary to investigate the potential net economic and clinical benefit of percutaneous LAAC in patients treated with OAC only.

Effect of Left Atrial Appendage Closure in Combination With Catheter Ablation on Left Atrial Function for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation

Background: A single procedure combining left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) plus catheter ablation (CA) has been proven to be safe and feasible for treating atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the influence of treatment modality on left atrial (LA) function is not thoroughly explained.

Objective: We aimed to investigate the changes of LA function in persistent AF patients undergoing concomitant LAAC and CA.

Methods: The study population comprised 65 patients who underwent combined AF ablation and Watchman LAAC (combined therapy group) in our center, and 65 participants of the AF simple ablation group who were matched based on sex, age, CHA₂DS₂-VASc score and HAS-BLED score using propensity score matching. During the 1-year follow-up period, two-dimensional echocardiography and speckle tracking echocardiography were performed to assess LA reservoir, conduit, and contractile function.

Results: The combined therapy was associated with a significant improvement in the LA reservoir function with increased expansion index and strain indices, including strain and strain rate (SR) during ventricular systole. Conduit function with SR during early ventricular diastole was also improved, as was contractile function with active atrial emptying fraction and SR during atrial systole. Similarly, LA reservoir and contractile function indices all improved continuously during follow-up after catheter ablation alone. At 3 months follow-up LA reservoir and conduit function with strain indices had a tendency to improve only in the simple procedure group. At 1-year follow-up there was no significant difference in either LA volumes or strain indices between the two groups.

Conclusion: Both the combined therapy group and the simple ablation group demonstrated significant improvement in LA function. Based upon the fact that LA function was improved in both groups it might be concluded that most of the effects appeared to result from ablation, not LAAC; furthermore the additional LAAC procedure did not affect the improvement of LA function after CA.