Cost-utility and cost-benefit analysis of TAVR availability in the US severe symptomatic aortic stenosis patient population

AIMS

We evaluated the availability of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) to determine its value across all severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (SSAS) patients, especially those untreated because of concerns regarding invasive surgical AVR (SAVR) and its impact on active aging.

METHODS

We performed payer perspective cost-utility analysis (CUA) and societal perspective cost-benefit analysis (CBA). The CBA's benefit measure is active time: salaried labor, unpaid work, and active leisure. The study population is a cohort of US elderly SSAS patients. We compared a "TAVR available" scenario in which SSAS patients distribute themselves across TAVR, SAVR, and medical management (MM); and a "TAVR not available" scenario with only SAVR and MM. We structured each scenario with a decision-tree model of SSAS patient treatment allocation. We measured the association between health and active time in the US Health and Retirement Study and used this association to impute active time to SSAS patients given their health.

RESULTS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and rate of return (RoR) of TAVR availability were $8,533 and 395%, respectively. CUA net monetary benefits (NMB) were $212,199 per patient and $43.4 billion population-wide. CBA NMB were $50,530 per patient and $10.3 billion population-wide.

LIMITATIONS

Among study limitations were scarcity of evidence regarding key parameters and the lack of long-term survival, health utility, and treatment cost data. Our analysis did not account for TAVR durability, retreatments, and valve-in-valve treatments.

CONCLUSION

Across risk-, age-, and treatment-eligibility groups, TAVR is the economically optimal treatment choice. It represents strong value-for-money per patient and population-wide. The vast majority of TAVR value involves raising treatment uptake among the untreated.

Predictors of Permanent Pacemaker Implantation in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

As transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) technology expands to healthy and lower‐risk populations, the burden and predictors of procedure‐related complications including the need for permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation needs to be identified.

Methods and Results

Digital databases were systematically searched to identify studies reporting the incidence of PPM implantation after TAVR. A random‐ and fixed‐effects model was used to calculate unadjusted odds ratios (OR) for all predictors. A total of 78 studies, recruiting 31 261 patients were included in the final analysis. Overall, 6212 patients required a PPM, with a mean of 18.9% PPM per study and net rate ranging from 0.16% to 51%. The pooled estimates on a random‐effects model indicated significantly higher odds of post‐TAVR PPM implantation for men (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.04–1.28); for patients with baseline mobitz type‐1 second‐degree atrioventricular block (OR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.64–5.93), left anterior hemiblock (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.09–1.86), bifascicular block (OR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.52–4.42), right bundle‐branch block (OR, 2.48; 95% CI, 2.17–2.83), and for periprocedural atriorventricular block (OR, 4.17; 95% CI, 2.69–6.46). The mechanically expandable valves had 1.44 (95% CI, 1.18–1.76), while self‐expandable valves had 1.93 (95% CI, 1.42–2.63) fold higher odds of PPM requirement compared with self‐expandable and balloon‐expandable valves, respectively.

Conclusions

Male sex, baseline atrioventricular conduction delays, intraprocedural atrioventricular block, and use of mechanically expandable and self‐expanding prosthesis served as positive predictors of PPM implantation in patients undergoing TAVR.

Effect of aorto-ventricular angulation on procedural success in transcatheter aortic valve replacements with the Lotus Valve system

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of aorto-ventricular angulation (AA) on procedural success with the Lotus Valve system.

BACKGROUND

AA, the angulation of the aortic valve basal plane, may affect the deployment of transcatheter aortic valve replacements (TAVRs). The Lotus Valve system is fully repositionable and delivered on a pre-shaped catheter which may alter the impact of AA on its deployment. The effect of AA on procedural and clinical outcomes with the Lotus valve is unreported.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent transfemoral TAVR with the Lotus Valve system were analyzed. AA was determined on pre-procedural multi-detector computed tomography imaging. Device success, procedural characteristics, and clinical events were assessed according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 (VARC2) definitions.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-five patients were analyzed (48% male, mean age 84 years). The mean AA was 47.8 degrees. Patients were, therefore, divided into low AA (AA < 48°) or high AA (AA ≥ 48°). Baseline characteristics were similar in both cohorts. Device success and procedural outcomes were also similar including procedure time, contrast dose, and need to reposition. There was no difference in degree of moderate or greater para-valvular regurgitation (PVR) (0% vs. 3%, P = 0.09). Clinical outcomes of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and other major VARC2 endpoints were similar.

CONCLUSION

AA did not affect device success or clinical outcome with the Lotus Valve system. The Lotus' unique design features may have mitigated the impact of AA by improving the accuracy, ease of valve positioning, and reducing PVR.