Radiofrequency ablation versus cryoablation for atrioventricular nodal re-entrant tachycardia in children: a value comparison.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether cryoablation or radiofrequency ablation offers better value for treating atrioventricular nodal re-entrant tachycardia in children. We aimed to compare the value of these procedures for treating atrioventricular nodal re-entrant tachycardia in children, with value being outcomes relative to costs. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of all atrioventricular nodal re-entrant tachycardia ablations for children (age⩽18 years) from July, 2009 to June, 2011 at our institution. Costs included fixed costs, miscellaneous hospital costs, and labour costs, and key outcomes were acute and long-term success (6 months) of the ablations. We conducted T-tests and regression analyses to investigate the associations between the ablation procedure type and the cost and success of the ablations. RESULTS: Of 96 unique cases performed by three paediatric electrophysiologists, 48 were cryoablation only, 42 radiofrequency ablation only, and six were a combination. Acute success was 100% for the cryoablation only and radiofrequency ablation only cases and 83% for the combination cases. There were no notable adverse events. The average total cost was $9636 for cryoablation cases, $9708 for radiofrequency ablation cases, and $10,967 for combination cases (p=0.51 for cryoablation only versus radiofrequency ablation only). The long-term success rate was 79.1% for cryoablation only, 92.8% for radiofrequency ablation only, and 66.7% for the combination (p=0.01 for cryoablation only versus radiofrequency ablation only), but long-term success varied notably by provider. CONCLUSIONS: Cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation offer similar value in the short term for the treatment of atrioventricular nodal re-entrant tachycardia in children. Differences in long-term success may vary substantially by physician, and thus may lead to differences in long-term value.

Transcatheter Versus Surgical Closure of Atrial Septal Defects in Children: A Value Comparison.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether a transcatheter procedure or surgical closure offers a better value proposition for atrial septal defect (ASD) closure. BACKGROUND: Secundum ASDs are common congenital heart defects with both transcatheter and surgical treatment options. Although both options have been shown to have excellent results in children, the relative value of the 2 procedures is unclear. METHODS: Using data from the Pediatric Hospital Information System for 2004 to 2012, we compared the value of transcatheter versus surgical ASD closure for children ages 1 to 17 years, with value being defined as outcomes relative to costs. Total charges for procedure-related encounters were converted to costs using hospital-specific cost-to-charge ratios, and all costs were adjusted for inflation to reflect 2012 dollars. RESULTS: There were 4,606 transcatheter procedures and 3,159 surgeries at 35 children's hospitals. Those undergoing transcatheter closure were more likely to be older (5.6 years vs. 4.5 years, p < 0.0001). There was no mortality in either group. Children with a surgical procedure had a longer length of stay (4.0 days vs. 1.5 days, p < 0.0001), were more likely to have an infection (odds ratio: 3.73, p < 0.0001) or procedural complication (odds ratio: 6.66, p < 0.0001). Costs for transcatheter procedure encounters were lower than costs for surgical encounters (mean of $19,128 vs. $25,359, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Both transcatheter and surgical ASD closure had excellent short-term outcomes, but transcatheter procedures had lower lengths of stay, rates of infection, and complications, resulting in lower overall costs. For children who are eligible, transcatheter ASD closure provides better short-term value than surgery.