• G Marsden, M Perry, A Bradbury, N Hickey, K Kelley, H Trender, D Wonderling, and A H Davies.
• National Clinical Guideline Centre, Royal College of Physicians, London, UK. Electronic address: gmarsden@ohe.org.
• Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2015 Dec 1; 50 (6): 794-801.

ObjectiveThe aim was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of interventional treatment for varicose veins (VV) in the UK NHS, and to inform the national clinical guideline on VV, published by the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence.DesignAn economic analysis was constructed to compare the cost-effectiveness of surgery, endothermal ablation (ETA), ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS), and compression stockings (CS). The analysis was based on a Markov decision model, which was developed in consultation with members of the NICE guideline development group (GDG).MethodsThe model had a 5-year time horizon, and took the perspective of the UK National Health Service. Clinical inputs were based on a network meta-analysis (NMA), informed by a systematic review of the clinical literature. Outcomes were expressed as costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).ResultsAll interventional treatments were found to be cost-effective compared with CS at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per QALY gained. ETA was found to be the most cost-effective strategy overall, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £3,161 per QALY gained compared with UGFS. Surgery and CS were dominated by ETA.ConclusionsInterventional treatment for VV is cost-effective in the UK NHS. Specifically, based on current data, ETA is the most cost-effective treatment in people for whom it is suitable. The results of this research were used to inform recommendations within the NICE guideline on VV.Copyright © 2015 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

39 keywords...

hide…