A Cost-Effective Approach to Resistant AV Fistula Stenosis: Successful Treatment Using Coronary OPN NC® Balloon in a Low-Income Setting.

Stenosis in the anastomotic site or venous limb of an arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is the most frequent cause of AVF failure. Percutaneous angioplasty with a standard or high-pressure balloon is the first-line treatment for AVF stenosis due to its higher technical success rate (90%) and lower complication rate (4%). Almost 20% of stenosis cases are resistant or undilatable by regular-pressure balloon angioplasty due to fibrosis, leading to technical failure or restenosis. Alternative therapies, such as atherectomy devices or cutting balloons, are expensive and difficult to obtain in low-income developing countries. We successfully treated resistant AVF stenosis with a coronary OPN-NC® ultra-high-pressure balloon and produced a good angiographic result with technical success. Coronary hardware is easily available and relatively cheaper compared to dedicated peripheral balloons or devices in our country due to reuse, which can be a boon in such type of cases. According to the standard hospital protocol, Cathlab hardware was reused.

IN.PACT AV Access Trial: Economic Evaluation of Drug-Coated Balloon Treatment for Dysfunctional Arteriovenous Fistulae Based on 12-Month Clinical Outcomes.

PURPOSE: To study, from a U.S. payer's perspective, the economic consequences of drug-coated balloon (DCB) versus standard percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) use for the treatment of stenotic lesions in dysfunctional hemodialysis arteriovenous fistulae. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cost differences between DCBs and PTA at year 1 and beyond were calculated via 2 methods. The first approach used the mean absolute number of trial-observed access circuit reinterventions through 12 months (0.65 ± 1.05 vs 1.05 ± 1.18 events per patient for DCBs and PTA, respectively) and projected treatment outcomes to 3 years. The second approach was based on the trial-observed access circuit primary patency rates at 12 months (53.8% vs 32.4%) and calculated the cost difference on the basis of previously published Medicare cost for patients who maintained or did not maintain primary patency. Assumptions regarding DCB device prices were tested in sensitivity analyses, and the numbers needed to treat were calculated. RESULTS: Using the absolute number of access circuit reinterventions approach, the DCB strategy resulted in an estimated per-patient savings of $1,632 at 1 year and $4,263 at 3 years before considering the DCB device cost. The access circuit primary patency approach was associated with a per-patient cost savings of $2,152 at 1 year and $3,894 at 2.5 years of follow-up. At the theoretical DCB device reimbursement of $1,800, savings were $1,680 and $2,049 at 2.5 and 3 years, respectively. The one-year NNT of DCB compared to PTA was 2.48. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular therapy for arteriovenous access stenosis with the IN.PACT AV DCB can be expected to be cost-saving if longer follow-up data confirm its clinical effectiveness.

Hospital costs of Balloon Pulmonary Angioplasty (BPA) procedure and management for CTEPH patients: An observational study based on the French national hospital discharge database (PMSI).

INTRODUCTION: Since 2014, Balloon Pulmonary Angioplasty (BPA) has become an emerging and complementary strategy for chronic thromboembolic hypertension (CTEPH) patients who are not suitable for pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA) or who have recurrent symptoms after the PEA procedure. OBJECTIVE: To assess the hospital cost of BPA sessions and management in CTEPH patients. METHODS: An observational retrospective cohort study of CTEPH-adults hospitalized for a BPA between January 1st, 2014 and June 30th, 2016 was conducted in the 2 centres performing BPA in France (Paris Sud and Grenoble) using the French national hospital discharge database (PMSI-MCO). Patients were followed until 6 months or death, whichever occurred first. Follow-up stays were classified as stays with BPA sessions, for BPA management or for CTEPH management based on a pre-defined algorithm and a medical review using type of diagnosis (ICD-10), delay from last BPA procedure stay and length of stay. Hospital costs (including medical transports) were estimated from National Health Insurance perspective using published official French tariffs from 2014 to 2016 and expressed in 2017 Euros. RESULTS: A total of 191 patients were analysed; mainly male (53%), with a mean age of 64,3 years. The first BPA session was performed 1.1 years in median (IQR 0.3-2.92) after the first PH hospitalisation. A mean of 3 stays with BPA sessions per patient were reported with a mean length of stay of 8 days for the first stay and 6 days for successive stays. The total hospital cost attributable to BPA was € 4,057,825 corresponding to €8,764±3,435 per stay and €21,245±12,843 per patient. Results were sensitive to age classes, density of commune of residence and some comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: The study generated robust real-world data to assess the hospital cost of BPA sessions and management in CTEPH patients within its first years of implementation in France.

Vascular Surgeons Are Not Adequately Valued by Traditional Productivity Metrics.

BACKGROUND: Reimbursements for professional services performed by clinicians are under constant scrutiny. The value of a vascular surgeon's services as measured by work relative value units (wRVUs) and professional reimbursement has decreased for some of the most common procedures performed. Hospital reimbursements, however, often remain stable or increases. We sought to evaluate fistulagrams as a case study and hypothesized that while wRVUs and professional reimbursements decrease, hospital reimbursements for these services increased over the same time period. METHODS: Medicare 5% claims data were reviewed to identify all fistulagrams with or without angioplasty or stenting performed between 2015 and 2018 using current procedural terminology codes. Reimbursements were classified into 3 categories: medical center (reimbursements made to a hospital for a fistulagram performed as an outpatient procedure), professional (reimbursement for fistulagrams based on compensation for procedures: work RVUs, practice expense RVU, malpractice expense RVU), and office-based laboratory (OBL, reimbursement for fistulagrams performed in an OBL setting). Medicare's Physician Fee Schedule was used to calculate wRVU and professional reimbursement. Medicare's Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System-Ambulatory Payment Classification was used to calculate hospital outpatient reimbursement. RESULTS: From 2015 to 2018, we identified 1,326,993 fistulagrams. During this study period, vascular surgeons experienced a 25% increase in market share for diagnostic fistulagrams. Compared with 2015, total professional reimbursements from 2017 to 2018 for all fistulagram procedures decreased by 41% (-$10.3 million) while OBL reimbursement decreased 29% (-$42.5 million) and wRVU decreased 36%. During the same period, medical center reimbursement increased by 6.6% (+$14.1 million). CONCLUSIONS: Vascular surgeons' contribution to a hospital may not be accurately reflected through traditional RVU metrics alone. Vascular surgeons performed an increasing volume of fistulagram procedures while experiencing marked reductions in wRVU and reimbursement. Medical centers, on the other hand, experienced an overall increase in reimbursement during the same time period. This study highlights that professional reimbursements, taken in isolation and without consideration of medical center reimbursement, undervalues the services and contributions provided by vascular surgeons.

Site of service influence on stent use for hemodialysis access interventions.

OBJECTIVE: With rising health care spending in the United States, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in recent years attempted to use reimbursement rates to influence use of less expensive care sites for covered patients, such as ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) and office-based laboratories (OBLs), in lieu of hospital service sites. It has been suggested that cost savings have not been realized because of more procedures being performed by physicians with ownership interests in nonhospital facilities. CMS adopted massive reimbursement changes for 2019 OBL and ASC-based procedures, which reduced dialysis access angioplasty reimbursement in the ASC setting by 50%, whereas facility reimbursement for stenting increased by 33% above prior levels. The clinical utility of adjunctive stenting in treating dialysis access stenosis remains controversial and highly discretionary. As a vascular group performing such procedures in both a hospital and nonhospital facility in which we have equity interest, we reviewed our use of stents in dialysis access procedures both in the hospital and in the ASC/OBL to determine whether site of service affected stent use. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database was performed from 2014 to 2018. All patients undergoing dialysis access angiography with angioplasty and adjunctive stent placement at our OBL (later ASC) and our primary hospital were included in the study. RESULTS: There were 961 angioplasty or stent procedures performed for dialysis accesses between the two sites, 564 (58.7%) in the hospital setting and 397 (41.3%) at the OBL/ASC. There was a significant difference in race and age between the two sites, with younger, minority patients more frequently being treated in the hospital and older, white patients more likely to be treated in the ambulatory setting; 153 (27.1%) underwent adjunctive stent placement in the hospital and 127 (32.0%) in the ambulatory setting (P = .09). CONCLUSIONS: Whereas financial incentives have not yet had an appreciable influence on stent use for dialysis access within previous reimbursement paradigms, the dramatic changes recently adopted by CMS may well alter this dynamic and could lead to substantially higher overall costs without proven clinical advantage. Interventionalists may be incentivized to add stents when performing balloon angioplasty in ASCs. With high failure and reintervention rates and increasingly expensive adjuncts (drug-coated balloons and stents, covered stents), the cost implications of attempts to incentivize interventionalists toward a specific type of procedure or site of care are substantial, and unintended negative consequences are likely to occur.

Clinical and Economic Benefits of Stent Grafts in Dysfunctional and Thrombosed Hemodialysis Access Graft Circuits in the REVISE Randomized Trial.

PURPOSE: To compare reinterventions and associated costs to maintain arteriovenous graft hemodialysis access circuits after rescue with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA), with or without concurrent Viabahn stent grafts, over 24 months. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter (n = 30 sites) study evaluated reintervention number, type, and cost in 269 patients randomized to undergo placement of stent grafts or PTA alone. Outcomes were 24-month average cumulative number of reinterventions, associated costs, and total costs for all patients and in 4 groups based on index treatment and clinical presentation (thrombosed or dysfunctional). RESULTS: Over 24 months, the patients in the stent graft arm had a 27% significant reduction in the average number of reinterventions within the circuit compared to the PTA arm (3.7 stent graft vs 5.1 PTA; P = .005) and similar total costs ($27,483 vs $28,664; P = .49). In thrombosed grafts, stent grafts significantly reduced the number of reinterventions (3.7 stent graft vs 6.2 PTA; P = .022) and had significantly lower total costs compared to the PTA arm ($30,329 vs $37,206; P = .027). In dysfunctional grafts, no statistical difference was observed in the number of reinterventions or total costs (3.7 stent graft vs 4.4 PTA; P = .12, and $25,421 stent graft and $22,610 PTA; P = .14). CONCLUSIONS: Over 24 months, the use of stent grafts significantly reduced the number of reinterventions for all patients, driven by patients presenting with thrombosed grafts. Compared to PTA, stent grafts reduced overall treatment costs for patients presenting with thrombosed grafts and had similar costs for stenotic grafts.

Two-Year Clinical Outcomes of the CONSEQUENT Trial: Can Femoropopliteal Lesions be Treated with Sustainable Clinical Results that are Economically Sound?

PURPOSE: The previously reported 6-month angiographic and 12-month clinical outcomes of the CONSEQUENT trial demonstrated the safety and efficacy of a novel paclitaxel-resveratrol-coated balloon for the treatment of lesions in the femoropopliteal segment. The purpose of this report is to present the 2-year results including a cost-benefit analysis for Germany. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with symptomatic peripheral artery occlusive disease in femoropopliteal lesions were randomized either to drug-coated balloon (DCB, n = 78) or plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA, n = 75). As secondary endpoints, the 2-year clinical results consisting of target lesion revascularization (TLR), patency and increase in walking distance were recorded. Based on the Kaplan-Meier analyses for TLR and other adverse events, a cost-benefit analysis was conducted for the German DRG system. RESULTS: There were no additional TLRs in both groups between 14 and 24 months so that the corresponding rates remained significantly different between the treatment groups (DCB: 19.1 vs. POBA 40.6%, p = 0.007). At 2 years, the patency rate was significantly higher in the DCB group (72.3 vs. 48.4%, p = 0.006). The walking distance increase was also significantly higher after DCB angioplasty (172 ± 103 vs. 52 ± 136 m, p = 0.001). We estimated 2-year cost savings of € 1111.97 per patient treated with DCB instead of POBA. CONCLUSIONS: The use of paclitaxel-resveratrol matrix-coated peripheral balloons compared to POBA was associated with a significantly reduced TLR rate, superior patency and substantial cost savings at 2 years. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01970579.

Public Health Impact of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Decision on Pass-Through Add-On Payments for Drug-Coated Balloons: A Call to Action.

On Wednesday, November 1, 2017, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) made a public decision to end the transitional pass-through add-on payment for drug-coated balloons beginning January 1, 2018, without creating a new ambulatory payment classification rate for these devices. In this Viewpoint, the authors highlight the disconnect between the CMS's decision not to create a new ambulatory payment classification category for drug-coated balloons despite demonstrated clinical superiority. The authors believe this decision is more in line with a rigid fee-for-service payment system than a value-based system that encourages quality over quantity, and disadvantages both the elderly and the poor. They call on all who advocate for patients with peripheral artery disease to action, encouraging their engagement on CMS decisions regarding payment.

Directional Atherectomy Is Associated with Better Long-Term Efficiency Compared with Angioplasty for Common Femoral Artery Occlusive Disease in Rutherford 2-4 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Despite increased interest in treating common femoral artery (CFA) with endovascular technology, there are little data regarding the long-term outcomes of different endovascular treatment modalities. We report the results after endovascular therapy of symptomatic obstructions of the CFA in a single center. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of consecutive patients with eligible CFA lesions who were treated with endovascular methods between 2011 and 2013. The preoperative demographic operative details and postoperative outcomes were compared and statistically analyzed. RESULTS: Ninety patients with CFA lesions were treated, and 76 (84.4%) completed a follow-up. Claudication was present in 62 of 76 (81.6%) patients, and stenosis was present in 60 of 76 (78.9%) patients. Angioplasty was performed in 45 patients, and atherectomy was performed in 31 patients. There was no significant difference in the preoperative demographic data, procedure time, contrast administration, or length of hospital stay between the 2 groups. In-hospital treatment costs were significantly higher in the atherectomy group (69,822 RenMinBi Yuan vs. 49,078 RenMinBi Yuan; P = 0.043). During the 4-year primary patency, for whole group or bifurcated/claudicant subgroup, all patients within the atherectomy group were significantly better than those in the angioplasty group. CONCLUSIONS: Atherectomy may be a better alternative to angioplasty for CFA atherosclerotic obstructions lesions. Compared with angioplasty, atherectomy seems to have better results in bifurcated lesions or claudicant patients. In diabetic patients, no superiority was found on either patency or improvement in walking distance.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of drug-coated therapies in the superficial femoral artery.

OBJECTIVE: Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) may increase durability of endovascular treatment of superficial femoral artery (SFA) disease while avoiding stent-related risks. The purpose of this study was to use meta-analytic data of DCB studies to compare the cost-effectiveness of potential SFA treatments: DCB, drug-eluting stent (DES), plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA), or bare-metal stent (BMS). METHODS: A search for randomized controlled trials comparing DCB with POBA for treatment of SFA disease was performed. Hazard ratios were extracted to account for the time-to-event primary outcome of target lesion revascularization. Odds ratios were calculated for the secondary outcomes of primary patency (PP) and major amputation. Incorporating pooled data from the meta-analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, assuming a payer perspective, used a decision model to simulate patency at 1 year and 2 years for each index treatment modality: POBA, BMS, DCB, or DES. Costs were based on current Medicare outpatient reimbursement rates. RESULTS: Eight studies (1352 patients) met inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. DCB outperformed POBA with respect to target lesion revascularization over time (pooled hazard ratio, 0.41; P < .001). Risk of major amputation at 12 months was not significantly different between groups. There was significantly improved 1-year PP in the DCB group compared with POBA (pooled odds ratio, 3.30; P < .001). In the decision model, the highest PP at 1 year was seen in the DES index therapy strategy (79%), followed by DCB (74%), BMS (71%), and POBA (64%). With a baseline cost of $9259.39 per patent limb at 1 year in the POBA-first group, the incremental cost per patent limb for each other strategy compared with POBA was calculated: $14,136.10/additional patent limb for DCB, $38,549.80/limb for DES, and $59,748,85/limb for BMS. The primary BMS option is dominated by being more expensive and less effective than DCB. Compared directly with DCB, DES costs $87,377.20 per additional patent limb at 1 year. Based on the projected PP at 1 year in the decision model, the number needed to treat for DES compared with DCB is 20. At current reimbursement, the use of more than two DCBs per procedure would no longer be cost-effective compared with DES. At 2 years, DCB emerges as the most cost-effective index strategy with the lowest overall cost and highest patency rates over that time horizon. CONCLUSIONS: Current data and reimbursements support the use of DCB as a cost-effective strategy for endovascular intervention in the SFA; any additional effectiveness of DES comes at a high price. Use of more than one DCB per intervention significantly decreases cost-effectiveness.

Hospital cost impact of orbital atherectomy with angioplasty for critical limb ischemia treatment: a modeling approach.

AIM: The incremental cost of peripheral orbital atherectomy system (OAS) plus balloon angioplasty (BA) versus BA-only for critical limb ischemia was estimated. MATERIALS & METHODS: A deterministic simulation model used clinical and healthcare utilization data from the CALCIUM 360° trial and current cost data. Incremental cost of OAS + BA versus BA-only included differential utilization during the procedure and adverse-event costs at 3, 6 and 12-months. RESULTS: For every 100 procedures, incremental annual costs to the hospital were US$350,930 lower with OAS + BA compared with BA-only. Despite higher upfront costs, savings were realized due to reduced need for revascularization, amputation and end-of-life care over 6-12-month postoperative period. CONCLUSION: Atherectomy with OAS prior to BA was associated with cost savings to the hospital.

Radiofrequency perforation of the pulmonary valve: an efficient low cost solution.

Objective The aim of the study was to assess the feasibility of using commonly available catheterization laboratory equipment for radiofrequency perforation of the pulmonary valve in patients with pulmonary atresia and intact ventricular septum. Methods The system (off-label use for all items) is made up of a co-axial telescopic arrangement consisting of a 0.014" PT 2 ™ coronary guidewire, for insulation inside a 2.7-F microcatheter which has an inner lumen of 0.021". The microcatheter was passed via a standard 4-F right coronary catheter to just below the atretic pulmonary valve. Radiofrequency (RF) energy was delivered using a standard electrosurgical system. In vitro testing had been performed and indicated that 5-10 W for 2-5 s would be sufficient for valve perforation. Results Radiofrequency perforation was successfully performed in all (n = 5, 100%) patients at a median age of 3 days (range: 1-36) and weight 2.7 kg (range 2.3-3.0). In one patient the pericardium was entered during the initial attempt; the generator was put on coagulation mode during retrieval of the guidewire and no haemopericardium occurred. The pulmonary valve was dilated in all; in three patients (n = 3) the ductus arteriosus was stented during the same session. Conclusion Results of the study show that it is feasible to perforate the pulmonary valve safely using this system. Availability, simplicity and cost are noteworthy benefits.

BAlloon versus Stenting in severe Ischaemia of the Leg-3 (BASIL-3): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Severe limb ischaemia (SLI) is defined as the presence of rest pain and/or tissue loss secondary to lower extremity atherosclerotic peripheral arterial disease. The superficial femoral and popliteal arteries are the most commonly diseased vessels in such patients and are being increasingly treated using endovascular revascularisation techniques. However, it is currently unknown whether drug-eluting stents and drug-coated balloons confer additional clinical benefits over more established techniques using plain balloons and bare metal stents, or whether they represent a cost-effective use of NHS resources. METHODS: The BASIL-3 trial is a UK National Institute for Health Research, Health Technology Assessment Programme-funded, multicentre, randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of plain balloon angioplasty with or without bail-out bare metal stenting, drug-coated balloon angioplasty with or without bail-out bare metal stenting, and primary stenting with drug-eluting stents for SLI secondary to femoro-popliteal disease. Patients with 'multilevel' disease may receive aorto-iliac and/or infrapopliteal treatments concurrently with their randomised femoro-popliteal intervention. The primary clinical outcome is amputation-free survival defined as the time to major (above the ankle) amputation of the index limb or death from any cause. The primary outcome for the economic analysis is cost per quality-adjusted life year. Secondary outcome measures include overall survival, major adverse limb events, major adverse cardiac events, relief of ischaemic pain, healing of tissue loss, and quality of life. The required sample size has been calculated at 861 participants (287 on each arm). These patients will be recruited over 3 years and followed-up for between 2 and 5 years. DISCUSSION: BASIL-3 is a pragmatic RCT designed to reflect current UK clinical practice. The results will inform decision-making regarding the appropriateness of funding the use of drug-coated balloons and drug-eluting stents, by the NHS, for the management of SLI due to femoro-popliteal disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry, identifier: ISRCTN14469736 . Registered on 22 October 2015.

A comparison of efficacy of endovascular versus surgical repair for the treatment of arteriovenous fistula stenosis in Taiwan.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) and fistula reconstruction surgery are therapeutic options for vascular access occlusion in hemodialysis patients. However, owing to its convenience, PTA has gradually become the preferred therapeutic option for fistula stenosis or occlusion. This study investigated the effects of the two therapeutic methods on the vascular access maintenance duration (number of days) and maintenance costs of fistula in dialysis patients from different dialysis units. METHODOLOGY: In this study, 544 hemodialysis patients from 2 dialysis units in a teaching hospital in the southern area of Taiwan were included in the analysis of the frequency of PTA or revascularization surgery and the use of related medical resources by conducting a retrospective chart review. RESULTS: The frequency of PTA in the patients undergoing long-term hemodialysis was not significantly associated with their demographic characteristics. The efficacy of PTA has declined with shorter maintenance duration with increasing PTA frequency. The cost profile of PTA was more expensive than that of fistula revascularization surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, PTA was found to be just a temporary solution for fistula thrombosis, whereas fistula reconstruction surgery is inexpensive and improves survival time. Therefore, dialysis units should establish an appropriate standard of care to avoid over-reliance on PTA in order to reduce the fistula failure rate, improve the dialysis efficacy, and reduce the psychological stress in patients, as well as to reduce the maintenance costs and rationalize the medical expenses.

Cost-Effectiveness of Endovascular Femoropopliteal Intervention Using Drug-Coated Balloons Versus Standard Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty: Results From the IN.PACT SFA II Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty versus standard percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA). BACKGROUND: Recent trials have reported lower rates of target lesion revascularization with DCB angioplasty versus standard PTA. However, the cost-effectiveness of DCB angioplasty is unknown. METHODS: A prospective economic study was performed alongside the IN.PACT SFA II (IN.PACT Admiral Drug-Coated Balloon vs. Standard Balloon Angioplasty for the Treatment of Superficial Femoral Artery [SFA] and Proximal Popliteal Artery [PPA]) trial, which randomized 181 patients with femoropopliteal disease to the IN.PACT DCB versus standard PTA. Resource use data were collected over 2-year follow-up, and costs were assigned using resource-based accounting and billing data. Health utilities were assessed using the EuroQol 5-dimensions questionnaire. Cost-effectiveness was assessed as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained using a decision-analytic model on the basis of empirical data from the trial assuming identical long-term mortality. RESULTS: Initial costs were $1,129 per patient higher with DCB angioplasty than standard PTA, driven by higher costs for the DCB itself. Between discharge and 24 months, target limb-related costs were $1,212 per patient lower with DCB angioplasty such that discounted 2-year costs were similar for the 2 groups ($11,277 vs. $11,359, p = 0.97), whereas QALYs tended to be greater among patients treated with DCBs (1.53 ± 0.44 vs. 1.47 ± 0.42, p = 0.40). The probability that DCB angioplasty is cost-effective compared with standard PTA was 70% using a threshold of $50,000 per QALY gained and 79% at a threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with femoropopliteal disease, DCB angioplasty is associated with better 2-year outcomes and similar target limb-related costs compared with standard PTA. Formal cost-effectiveness analysis on the basis of these results suggests that use of the DCB angioplasty is likely to be economically attractive.

Angioplasty with drug coated balloons for the treatment of infrainguinal peripheral artery disease.

Restenosis or re-occlusion after femoropopliteal angioplasty or stent implantation is the main limitation of endovascular treatment strategies for peripheral artery disease. Within the last years, balloon catheters with anti-proliferative drug coating on the balloon surface have shown to be associated with higher patency rates compared to plain balloon angioplasty. Thus, drug-coated balloons were gradually adopted in many interventional centres for the treatment of femoropopliteal obstructions. The current review summarises the existing evidence for drug-coated balloons in the infrainguinal vessels and their indication in special lesion cohorts.

Economic analysis of endovascular drug-eluting treatments for femoropopliteal artery disease in the UK.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the clinical and economic impact of drug-eluting endovascular treatment strategies for femoropopliteal artery disease compared with current standard of care. DESIGN: Systematic literature search to pool target lesion revascularisations (TLR). Model-based per-patient cost impact and quasi-cost-effectiveness projection over 24 months based on pooled TLRs and current reimbursement. SETTING: The UK's National Health Service (NHS). PARTICIPANTS: Patients presenting with symptomatic femoropopliteal disease eligible for endovascular treatment. INTERVENTIONS: Current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline-recommended treatment with percutaneous transluminal balloon angioplasty (PTA) and bailout bare metal stenting (BMS) versus primary BMS placement, or drug-coated balloon (DCB), or drug-eluting stent (DES) treatment. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: 24-month per-patient cost impact to NHS (primary outcome). SECONDARY OUTCOMES: pooled 24-month TLR rates; numbers needed to treat (NNTs); cost per TLR avoided and estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in £ per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). RESULTS: N=28 studies were identified, reporting on 5167 femoropopliteal lesions. Over 24 months, DCB, DES and BMS reduced TLRs of de novo lesions from 36.2% to 17.6%, 19.4% and 26.9%, respectively, at an increased cost of £43, £44 and £112. NNTs to avoid 1 TLR in 24 months were 5.4, 6.0 and 10.8, resulting in cost per TLR avoided of £231, £264 and £1204. DCB was estimated to add 0.011 QALYs, DES 0.010 QALYs and BMS 0.005 QALYs, resulting in estimated ICERs of £3983, £4534 and £20 719 per QALY gained. A subset analysis revealed more favourable clinical and economic outcomes for a 3.5 µg/mm(2) DCB with urea excipient, compared with the rest of DCBs. A modest reduction of 10% in DCB and DES prices made drug-eluting treatments dominant. CONCLUSIONS: Widespread adoption of drug-eluting endovascular therapies for femoropopliteal disease would add meaningful clinical benefit at reasonable additional costs to the NHS. Based on currently available data, DCBs offer the highest clinical and economic value.

Drug-coated balloons are replacing the need for nitinol stents in the superficial femoral artery.

Amassed evidence from several randomized controlled trials and high quality meta-analyses clearly support the primary use of paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCB) in the superficial femoral artery over traditional plain balloon angioplasty or primary bare nitinol stenting with significantly lower vascular restenosis, less need for repeat procedures, improved quality of life and potential cost savings for the healthcare system. Stents may be reserved for bail-out in case of a suboptimal dilatation result, and for selected more complex lesions, or in case of critical limb ischemia in order to eliminate vessel recoil and maximize immediate hemodynamic gain. Debulking atherectomy remains unproven, but holds a lot of promise in particular in combination with PCBs, in order to improve compliance of the vessel wall by plaque removal, allow for a better angioplasty result and optimize drug transfer and bioavailability. The present overview summarizes and discusses current evidence about femoropopliteal PCB angioplasty compared to the historical standard of plain old balloon angioplasty and bare nitinol stents. Available evidence is appraised in the context of clinically meaningful results, relevant unresolved issues are highlighted, and future trends are discussed.