• Meor Azraai, Lan Gao, and Andrew E Ajani.
• Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia; University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.. Electronic address: meor.azraai@mh.org.au.
• Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2020 Sep 1; 21 (9): 1164-1168.

IntroductionTranscatheter aortic valve intervention (TAVI) is known to be non-inferior to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low-intermediate surgical risk patients. This present systematic review was conducted to analyse the cost-effectiveness of TAVI in this patient population.MethodsFour electronic databases from January 2010 to November 2019 were used to identify relevant cost-effectiveness studies of TAVI versus SAVR in low-intermediate risk patients. The primary endpoints were the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and the probability of cost effectiveness. The eligible studies for the present systematic review included those in which the cost-effectiveness data were measured or projected for TAVI and SAVR.ResultsEight studies were included in this review, where six studies involved intermediate risk patients and two studies with low risk patients. The reported ICER for TAVI compared to SAVR in low-intermediate risk patients were below the ICER threshold of acceptability in all studies. The probability of TAVI being cost-effective compared to SAVR ranged from 78%-97%.ConclusionsTAVI is likely to be a cost-effective alternative to SAVR in low-intermediate risk patients. More studies on low risk patients is needed.Crown Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

14 keywords...

hide…