RESUMO
Background: Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) is a novel technology with certain advantages in treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF), yet there is limited research on the use of ICE in radiofrequency ablation for AF treatment in China. The aim of this study was to investigate the total fluoroscopy time and dose, safety, and effectiveness of ICE guided vs. traditional fluoroscopy (non-ICE) guided radiofrequency ablation for AF in China. Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective analysis of patients who underwent ICE or traditional fluoroscopy-guided radiofrequency ablation for AF. The primary endpoint of this study was total fluoroscopy time, and the secondary endpoints included total fluoroscopy dose, acute surgery failure, transseptal puncture time, ablation time, total procedure time, and 6-month surgery success (no AF recurrence or atrial flutter). As an exploratory analysis, outcomes of interest by different types of AF were examined. Results: A total of 97 patients were included in the analysis. Forty-eight were in the ICE group and 49 were in the non-ICE group with comparable demographic and clinical characteristics at the baseline. None of patients experienced acute surgery failure with no major procedure-related complications occurred. The fluoroscopic time and dose were significantly lower in the ICE group compared to the non-ICE group (0.00 vs. 9.67±4.88 min, P<0.001; 0.00 vs. 77.10±44.28 mGy/cm2, P<0.001, respectively). There were no statistically significant differences in transseptal puncture time, ablation time and total procedure time between the two groups. There were two AF recurrences observed during the 6-month follow-up in each group (P>0.99). Conclusions: ICE significantly reduced the fluoroscopic time and dose for radiofrequency catheter ablation in AF patients. There were no significant differences in safety or effectiveness outcomes between the ICE and non-ICE groups.
RESUMO
Aim: To evaluate the costs and consequences of two front-line atrial fibrillation (AF) treatments from Chinese healthcare system perspective: radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) using ThermoCool SmartTouch Catheter guided by Ablation Index (STAI), in comparison to antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs). Patients & methods: We simulated clinical and economic consequences for AF patients initially receiving STAI or AADs using a short-term decision tree model leading to a 10-year long-term Markov model. The model projected both clinical consequences and costs associated with, among others, AF, heart failure (HF), strokes, and deaths due to AF or AF related complications. Data informing the models included combination of a local real-world study and published clinical studies. Results: STAI was advantageous versus AADs on all 4 main clinical outcomes evaluated; AF: 25.83% lower (12.84% vs 38.67%), HF: 2.22% lower (1.33% vs 3.55%), stroke or post stroke: 1.82% lower (10.00% vs 11.82%) and deaths due to AF or AF related complications: 0.64% lower (4.11% vs 4.75%). The average total cost per patient in STAI group was ¥16,682 lower (¥123,124 vs ¥139,806). The one-way sensitivity analysis indicated that the difference in total cost was most sensitive to annual AF recurrence probability in AADs-treated patients. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated a 98.5% probability that RFCA treatment would result in cost savings by the end of the 10th year. Conclusion: Radiofrequency catheter ablation using SmartTouch catheter guided by Ablation Index was superior to AADs as the first-line AF treatment in Chinese setting with better clinical outcomes and at lower costs over a 10-year time horizon.
Assuntos
Fibrilação Atrial , Ablação por Cateter , Acidente Vascular Cerebral , Humanos , Fibrilação Atrial/cirurgia , Fibrilação Atrial/tratamento farmacológico , Antiarrítmicos/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Análise Custo-Benefício , CatéteresRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Relmacabtagene autoleucel (relma-cel) was recently approved in China for treating relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (r/r LBCL). We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of Chinese healthcare system. METHODS: A mixture-cure model was developed to project life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), and overall direct cost with a lifetime horizon for patients with r/r LBCL treated with relma-cel versus salvage chemotherapy. Patient-level data from RELIANCE trial and published data from Collaborative Trial in Relapsed Aggressive Lymphoma extension study were used to inform the model. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated and cost-effectiveness was evaluated at the willingness-to-pay threshold of 3 times the national gross domestic product per capita. RESULTS: The model projected that treatment with relma-cel was associated with incremental gains of 5.11 LYs and 5.26 QALYs compared with salvage chemotherapy at an increased cost of ¥1 067 430 (â¼$154 152), resulting in an ICER of ¥203 137 (â¼$29 435) per QALY. The model was most sensitive to the uncertainty around the estimated cure rate. The ICER of relma-cel was within the willingness-to-pay threshold in the base case and the probability of relma-cel treatment being considered cost-effective was approximately 74%. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with salvage chemotherapy, treatment with relma-cel for r/r LBCL in patients who have failed at least 2 lines of systemic therapy is within the cost-effective range from the perspective of Chinese healthcare system and represents a good use of healthcare resources.
