Katherine Vilain

Cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with standard care among inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis: results from the placement of aortic transcatheter valves (PARTNER) trial (Cohort B).

Background— In patients with severe aortic stenosis who cannot have surgery, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been shown to improve survival and quality of life compared with standard therapy, but the costs and cost-effectiveness of this strategy are not yet known. Methods and Results— The PARTNER trial randomized patients with symptomatic, severe aortic stenosis who were not candidates for surgery to TAVR (n=179) or standard therapy (n=179). Empirical data regarding survival, quality of life, medical resource use, and hospital costs were collected during the trial and used to project life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy, and lifetime medical care costs to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of TAVR from a US perspective. For patients treated with TAVR, mean costs for the initial procedure and hospitalization were

Cost Effectiveness of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Compared with Standard Care Among Inoperable Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis: Results from The PARTNER Trial (Cohort B)

42 806 and

Cost-Effectiveness of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Compared With Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in High-Risk Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis : Results of the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) Trial (Cohort A)

78 542, respectively. Follow-up costs through 12 months were lower with TAVR (

Cost-Effectiveness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Drug Eluting Stents Versus Bypass Surgery for Patients With Diabetes Mellitus and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease Results From the FREEDOM Trial

29 289 versus

Cost-Effectiveness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Bypass Surgery for Patients With 3-Vessel or Left Main Coronary Artery Disease Final Results From the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) Trial

53 621) because of reduced hospitalization rates, but cumulative 1-year costs remained higher (

Cost-Effectiveness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Drug-Eluting Stents vs. Bypass Surgery for Patients with 3-Vessel or Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Final Results from the SYNTAX Trial

106 076 versus

Cost-Effectiveness of Solitaire Stent Retriever Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke: Results From the SWIFT-PRIME Trial (Solitaire With the Intention for Thrombectomy as Primary Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke).

53 621). We projected that over a patients lifetime, TAVR would increase discounted life expectancy by 1.6 years (1.3 quality-adjusted life-years) at an incremental cost of

Cost-effectiveness of edoxaban vs warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation based on results of the ENGAGE AF–TIMI 48 trial

79 837. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for TAVR was thus estimated at

Cost-Effectiveness of Everolimus- Versus Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization (from the SPIRIT-IV Trial)

50 200 per year of life gained or

Cost-effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention versus bypass surgery from a Dutch perspective.

61 889 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. These results were stable across a broad range of uncertainty and sensitivity analyses. Conclusions— For patients with severe aortic stenosis who are not candidates for surgery, TAVR increases life expectancy at an incremental cost per life-year gained well within accepted values for commonly used cardiovascular technologies. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00530894.