Evaluating the Cost-effectiveness of Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation

Antiarrhythmic drug therapy and catheter ablation in patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Catheter ablation and antiarrhythmic drug therapy are utilized for rhythm control in atrial fibrillation (AF), but their comparative effectiveness, especially with contemporary treatment modalities, remains undefined. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis contrasting current ablation techniques against antiarrhythmic medications for AF.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, SCOPUS, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science until November 2023 for randomized trials comparing AF catheter ablation with antiarrhythmics, against antiarrhythmic drug therapy alone, reporting outcomes for > 6 months. Four investigators extracted data and appraised risk of bias (ROB) with ROB 2 tool. Meta-analyses estimated pooled efficacy and safety outcomes using R software.

RESULTS

Twelve trials (n = 3977) met the inclusion criteria. Catheter ablation was associated with lower AF recurrence (relative risk (RR) = 0.44, 95%CI (0.33, 0.59), P ˂ 0.0001) and hospitalizations (RR = 0.44, 95%CI (0.23, 0.82), P = 0.009) than antiarrhythmic medications. Catheter ablation also improved the physical quality of life component score (assessed by a 36-item Short Form survey) by 7.61 points (95%CI -0.70-15.92, P = 0.07); but, due to high heterogeneity, it was not statistically significant. Ablation was significantly associated with higher procedural-related complications [RR = 15.70, 95%CI (4.53, 54.38), P < 0.0001] and cardiac tamponade [RR = 9.22, 95%CI (2.16, 39.40), P = 0.0027]. All-cause mortality was similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

For symptomatic AF, upfront catheter ablation reduces arrhythmia and hospitalizations better than continued medical therapy alone, albeit with moderately more adverse events. Careful patient selection and risk-benefit assessment are warranted regarding the timing of ablation.

Major drivers of healthcare system costs and cost variability for routine atrial fibrillation ablation

Background

Catheter ablation is an effective treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF) but incurs significant financial costs to payers. Reducing variability may improve cost effectiveness.

Objectives

We aimed to measure (1) the components of direct and indirect costs for routine AF ablation procedures, (2) the variability of those costs, and (3) the main factors driving ablation cost variability.

Methods

Using data from the University of Utah Health Value Driven Outcomes system, we were able to measure direct, inflation-adjusted costs of uncomplicated, routine AF ablation to the healthcare system. Direct costs were considered costs incurred by pharmacy, disposable supplies, patient labs, implants, and other services categories (primarily anesthesia support) and indirect costs were considered within imaging, facility, and electrophysiology lab management categories.

Results

A total of 910 patients with 1060 outpatient ablation encounters were included from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2020. Disposable supplies accounted for the largest component of cost with 44.8 ± 9.7%, followed by other services (primarily anesthesia support) with 30.4 ± 7.7% and facility costs with 16.1 ± 5.6%; pharmacy, imaging, and implant costs each contributed <5%. Direct costs were larger than indirect costs (82.4 ± 5.6% vs 17.6 ± 5.6%). Multivariable regression showed that procedure operator was the primary factor associated with AF ablation overall cost (up to 12% differences depending on operator).

Conclusions

Direct costs and other services (primarily anesthesia) drive the majority costs associated with AF ablations. There is significant variability in costs for these routine, uncomplicated AF ablation procedures. The procedure operator, and not patient characteristic, is the main driver for cost variability.

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.

Long-Term Cost-Effectiveness Comparison of Catheter Ablation and Antiarrhythmic Drugs in Atrial Fibrillation Treatment Using Discrete Event Simulation

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the lifetime cost-effectiveness of 3 widely used atrial fibrillation (AF) treatments from the perspectives of Chinese healthcare system: antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs), ThermoCool SmartTouch guided by ablation index (STAI), and second-generation cryoballoon (CB2).

METHODS

A discrete event simulation (DES) model was implemented to compare the lifetime cost-effectiveness of AADs, STAI, and CB2. AF disease progression was explicitly modeled based on the Atrial Fibrillation Progression Trial clinical study results. The base-case analysis assumed that patients with paroxysmal AF (PAF) entered the model at the age of 55 years and had a CHA2DS2-VASc (Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age ( > 65 = 1 point, > 75 = 2 points), Diabetes, previous Stroke/transient ischemic attack (2 points)-Vascular disease (peripheral arterial disease, previous myocardial infarction, aortic atheroma), Age 65 to 74 years, and Sex category) score of 2 for males and 3 for females. Model parameter uncertainties were incorporated throughout the DES simulation with full probabilistic model parameterization.

RESULTS

The lifetime cost-effectiveness evaluations showed that patients treated with AADs gained an average of 4.98 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and 9.63 life-years (LYs) at an average cost of US dollar (USD) 15 374. Patients treated with CB2 gained 5.92 QALYs and 10.74 LYs at an average cost of USD 26 811. The STAI group gained an average of 6.55 QALYs and 11.57 LYs at an average cost of USD 24 722. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios was USD 5927 and USD 12 167 per QALY for STAI versus AADs and CB2 versus AADs, respectively. Assuming the willingness-to-pay threshold for China is USD 30 390 per QALY, both ablation treatments will be cost-effective compared with AADs for patients with PAF.

CONCLUSIONS

The DES model demonstrated that catheter ablations are more cost-effective than AADs for patients with PAF under the healthcare system in China. Among catheter ablation technologies, STAI provides better outcomes at lower costs.

Atrial fibrillation catheter ablation complications in obese and diabetic patients: Insights from the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample 2005-2013

BACKGROUND

Obesity and diabetes are risk factors for atrial fibrillation (AF) incidence and recurrence after catheter ablation. However, their impact on post-ablation complications in real-world practice is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

We examine annual trends in AF ablations and procedural outcomes in obese and diabetic patients in the US and whether obesity and diabetes are independently associated with adverse outcomes.

METHODS

Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2005-2013), we identified obese and diabetic patients admitted for AF ablation. Common complications were identified using ICD-9-CM codes. The primary outcome included the composite of any in-hospital complication or death. Annual trends of the primary outcome, length-of-stay (LOS) and total-inflation adjusted hospital charges were examined. Multivariate analyses studied the association of obesity and diabetes with outcomes.

RESULTS

An estimated 106 462 AF ablations were performed in the US from 2005 to 2013. Annual trends revealed a gradual increase in ablations performed in obese and diabetic patients and in complication rates. The overall rate of the primary outcome in obese was 11.7% versus 8.2% in non-obese and 10.7% in diabetic versus 8.2% in non-diabetic patients (p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Obesity was independently associated with increased complications (adjusted OR, 95% CI:1.39, 1.20-1.62), longer LOS (1.36, 1.23-1.49), and higher charges (1.16, 1.12-1.19). Diabetes was only associated with longer LOS (1.27, 1.16-1.38). Obesity, but not diabetes, in patients undergoing AF ablation is an independent risk factor for immediate post-ablation complications and higher costs. Future studies should investigate whether weight loss prior to ablation reduces complications and costs.

Cost-Utility of Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Heart Failure: An Economic Evaluation

Background Recent trials comparing catheter ablation to medical therapy in patients with heart failure (HF) with symptomatic atrial fibrillation despite first-line management have demonstrated a reduction in adverse outcomes. We performed an economic evaluation to estimate the cost-utility of catheter ablation as second line therapy in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. Methods and Results A Markov model with health states of alive, dead, and alive with amiodarone toxicity was constructed, using the perspective of the Canadian healthcare payer. Patients in the alive states were at risk of HF and non-HF hospitalizations. Parameters were obtained from randomized trials and Alberta health system data for costs and outcomes. A lifetime time horizon was adopted, with discounting at 3.0% annually. Probabilistic and 1-way sensitivity analyses were performed. Costs are reported in 2018 Canadian dollars. A patient treated with catheter ablation experienced lifetime costs of $64 960 and 5.63 quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), compared with $49 865 and 5.18 QALYs for medical treatment. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $35 360/QALY (95% CI, $21 518-77 419), with a 90% chance of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000/QALY. A minimum mortality reduction of 28%, or a minimum duration of benefit of >1 to 2 years was required for catheter ablation to be attractive at this threshold. Conclusions Catheter ablation is likely to be cost-effective as a second line intervention for patients with HF with symptomatic atrial fibrillation, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratio $35 360/QALY, as long as over half of the relative mortality benefit observed in extant trials is borne out in future studies.

Computational models of atrial fibrillation: achievements, challenges, and perspectives for improving clinical care

Despite significant advances in its detection, understanding and management, atrial fibrillation (AF) remains a highly prevalent cardiac arrhythmia with a major impact on morbidity and mortality of millions of patients. AF results from complex, dynamic interactions between risk factors and comorbidities that induce diverse atrial remodelling processes. Atrial remodelling increases AF vulnerability and persistence, while promoting disease progression. The variability in presentation and wide range of mechanisms involved in initiation, maintenance and progression of AF, as well as its associated adverse outcomes, make the early identification of causal factors modifiable with therapeutic interventions challenging, likely contributing to suboptimal efficacy of current AF management. Computational modelling facilitates the multilevel integration of multiple datasets and offers new opportunities for mechanistic understanding, risk prediction and personalized therapy. Mathematical simulations of cardiac electrophysiology have been around for 60 years and are being increasingly used to improve our understanding of AF mechanisms and guide AF therapy. This narrative review focuses on the emerging and future applications of computational modelling in AF management. We summarize clinical challenges that may benefit from computational modelling, provide an overview of the different in silico approaches that are available together with their notable achievements, and discuss the major limitations that hinder the routine clinical application of these approaches. Finally, future perspectives are addressed. With the rapid progress in electronic technologies including computing, clinical applications of computational modelling are advancing rapidly. We expect that their application will progressively increase in prominence, especially if their added value can be demonstrated in clinical trials.

Cardiac MRI to Manage Atrial Fibrillation

AF is the most common arrhythmia in clinical practice. In addition to the severe effect on quality of life, patients with AF are at higher risk of stroke and mortality. Recent studies have suggested that atrial and ventricular substrate play a major role in the development and maintenance of AF. Cardiac MRI has emerged as a viable tool for interrogating the underlying substrate in AF patients. Its advantage includes localisation and quantification of structural remodelling. Cardiac MRI of the atrial substrate is not only a tool for management and treatment of arrhythmia, but also to individualise the prevention of stroke and major cardiovascular events. This article provides an overview of atrial imaging using cardiac MRI and its clinical implications in the AF population.

Healthcare utilization and cost in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure undergoing catheter ablation

Background

Catheter ablation is an effective treatment for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF). However, little is known about how healthcare utilization and cost change after ablation in this population. We sought to determine healthcare utilization and cost patterns among patients with AF and HF undergoing ablation.

Methods

Using a large United States administrative database, we identified (n = 1568) treated with ablation with a primary and secondary diagnosis of AF and HF, respectively, were evaluated 1‐year pre‐ and postablation for outcomes including inpatient admissions (AF or HF), emergency department (ED) visits, cardioversions, length of stay (LOS), and cost. A secondary analysis was extended to 3‐years postablation.

Results

Reductions were observed in AF‐related admissions (64%), LOS (65%), cardioversions (52%), ED visits (51%, all values, p < .0001), and HF‐related admissions (22%, p = .01). There was a 40% reduction in inpatient admission cost ($4165 preablation to $2510 postablation, p < .0001). In a sensitivity analysis excluding repeat‐ablation patients, a greater reduction in overall AF management cost was observed compared to the full cohort (−43% vs. −2%). Comparing 1‐year pre‐ to 3‐years postablation, both total mean AF‐management cost ($850 per‐patient per‐month 1‐year pre‐ to $546 3‐years postablation, p < .0001) and AF‐related healthcare utilization was reduced.

Conclusions

Catheter ablation in patients with AF and HF resulted in significant reductions in healthcare utilization and cost through 3‐years of follow‐up. This reduction was observed regardless of whether repeat ablation was performed, reflecting the positive impact of ablation on longer term cost reduction.

Cost-effectiveness of ablation of ventricular tachycardia in ischaemic cardiomyopathy: limitations in the trial evidence base

Objective

Catheter ablation is an important treatment for ventricular tachycardia (VT) that reduces the frequency of episodes of VT. We sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of catheter ablation versus antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy.

Methods

A decision-analytic Markov model was used to calculate the costs and health outcomes of catheter ablation or AAD treatment of VT for a hypothetical cohort of patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy and an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. The health states and input parameters of the model were informed by patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQL) data using randomised clinical trial (RCT)-level evidence wherever possible. Costs were calculated from a 2018 UK perspective.

Results

Catheter ablation versus AAD therapy had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £144 150 (€161 448) per quality-adjusted life-year gained, over a 5-year time horizon. This ICER was driven by small differences in patient-reported HRQL between AAD therapy and catheter ablation. However, only three of six RCTs had measured patient-reported HRQL, and when this was done, it was assessed infrequently. Using probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the likelihood of catheter ablation being cost-effective was only 11%, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30 000 used by the UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

Conclusion

Catheter ablation of VT is unlikely to be cost-effective compared with AAD therapy based on the current randomised trial evidence. However, better designed studies incorporating detailed and more frequent quality of life assessments are needed to provide more robust and informed cost-effectiveness analyses.

Impact of catheter ablation therapy for atrial fibrillation on healthcare expenditures in a middle European cohort

Aims

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most prevalent arrhythmia in western countries. It is associated with increased mortality and morbidity and responsible for hospitalization rates of 10–40% per patient per year. Studies from the UK and the USA have shown that AF is responsible for ∼1% of the total healthcare expenditures in these countries. The only potentially curative treatment is pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). Published health economic data on the impact of PVI mainly consist of simulations of expenditures with assumed efficacy taken from ablation studies. Real expenditure data are missing as well as pre-ablation period data and long-term data.

Methods and results

We analyse true healthcare expenditures based on inpatient and outpatient data from the Upper Austrian Health Insurance Fund social security system of patients undergoing PVI during 2005 to 2015. We identified 1135 patients undergoing PVI with 268 having multiple procedures. Days of hospitalization and days of sick leave started to rise in the year before ablation. PVI was able to lower both parameters to the level of 1 year before ablation. Comparing four quarters before and after a single-index ablation, a highly significant reduction in inpatient healthcare expenditures was documented. There was a significant, but numerically small increase in outpatient expenditures, resulting in a significant reduction in overall healthcare expenditures.

Conclusion

Analysing a cohort of the Upper Austrian Health Insurance Fund undergoing PVI, we found significant cost-saving effects on post-interventional healthcare expenditures and a reduction in days of sick leave.

The Evolving Role of Catheter Ablation in Patients With Heart Failure and AF

AF and heart failure are emerging epidemics worldwide. Several recent trials have provided a growing evidence base for the benefits of catheter ablation in this patient group, which are yet to be universally adopted in clinical practice guidelines. This paper provides a summary of recent developments in this field and provides pragmatic advice to the treating physician regarding the appropriate role of catheter ablation in the overall management of patients with comorbid AF and heart failure.

Real-world outcomes, complications, and cost of catheter-based ablation for atrial fibrillation: an update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Catheter-based ablation for atrial fibrillation is a useful and effective form of rhythm-control therapy for symptomatic patients. This article reviews the 'real-world' experience on the outcomes, complications, and costs of atrial fibrillation ablation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Currently, real-world outcomes of atrial fibrillation ablation are derived from retrospective analysis of administrative databases or prospective registries from selected centers and patients. The rate of atrial fibrillation recurrence was reported to be as high as 60% and the rate of repeat ablation ranged from ≈10 to 18% within 1 year after ablation. All-cause hospitalizations after atrial fibrillation ablation were frequent, at up to ≈30% within 1 year and with up to half of them related to atrial fibrillation recurrence or repeat procedures. Rates of periprocedural complications were relatively low (≈3%). Female sex was associated with higher risk of complications such as bleeding, vascular injury, and tamponade. Markov models examining the cost-effectiveness of ablation yielded favorable results when success rates of more than 70% were assumed with long time horizons (>5 years).

SUMMARY

The real-world outcomes of atrial fibrillation ablation are sobering. Confirmation of these findings with prospective, population-based, minimally biased studies is needed. There is a critical need to delineate the downstream economic impact of atrial fibrillation ablation on society to justify its continued delivery and growth.

Cost-Effectiveness of Cardiac Radiosurgery for Atrial Fibrillation: Implications for Reducing Health Care Morbidity, Utilization, and Costs

In the United States (U.S.), atrial fibrillation (AF) is the second-most common cardiovascular condition after hypertension, affecting four million Americans each year. Individuals with AF are three times more likely to be hospitalized over the span of a year when compared to medically matched control groups. The considerably large clinical population of individuals with AF mandates that the cost-effectiveness and efficacy of current treatment regimens for AF have egregious implications for health care spending and public health. Unfortunately, catheter ablation for AF treatment has been shown to make only modest gains in quality-adjusted life years, has yet to demonstrate cost-utility advantages over conventional therapies for AF, and has a reported rate of recurrence for AF that is notably high. Thus, there is a major unmet clinical need for a therapeutic option to treat AF that produces more consistent and efficacious results that are cost-effective. Cardiac radiosurgery as a therapy for AF has the potential to be remarkably cost-effective and produce robust patient outcomes. CyberHeart Inc. has developed the world's first-ever cardiac radiosurgery (CRS) system designed to ablate the heart non-invasively. Procedures that ablate the heart utilizing the Cyberheart CRS system are anticipated to allow higher efficacy and more consistent results than current techniques such as catheter ablation. The aim of this study is to present the current healthcare utilization and expenditures in AF treatment, report the cost-effectiveness of catheter ablation for AF, and project the potential cost-effectiveness of cardiac radiosurgery for the treatment of AF.