» Articles » PMID: 24358413

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Intracranial Stent Placement Versus Contemporary Medical Management in Patients with Symptomatic Intracranial Artery Stenosis

Overview
Date 2013 Dec 21
PMID 24358413
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Intracranial angioplasty and stent placement has been increasingly evaluated as a new method for treatment of symptomatic intracranial stenosis in select patients. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved intracranial stent treatment of symptomatic atherosclerotic intracranial lesions.

Purpose: To determine the cost-effectiveness of intracranial artery stent placement compared with contemporary medical management for secondary stroke prevention among patients with symptomatic intracranial stenosis.

Methods: Clinical outcome data were obtained from the aspirin treatment arm of the Comparison of Warfarin and Aspirin for Symptomatic Intracranial Disease (WASID) trial (n = 280) and 12 case series (n = 216) of patients who underwent stent placement of symptomatic intracranial stenosis with comparable characteristics. Total cost of procedure and medical management-only was calculated using the rates of major stroke, minor stroke, or death in each group. All costs are expressed in 2010 US$. The quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of each intervention strategy was estimated using the frequency of the outcomes of major and minor stroke, death, and baseline health. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was formulated for a 1-year period.

Results: The total rate of stroke at one year was 10.2% (6.1-14.2%) and the rate of all-cause mortality was 3.7% (1.2-6.2%) in the stent group. The corresponding annualized rates of stroke and all-cause mortality in the medical management-only group were 15% (10.8-19.2%) and 2.4% (0.6-4.2%), respectively. The calculated net costs at one year for intracranial stent placement and contemporary medical management were US$16,898 and US$3,468, respectively. Overall, QALYs for the two groups were 0.82 and 0.81 (in a range of 0 to 0.89 corresponding to death and baseline health), respectively. The cost per QALY gained after intracranial stent placement and contemporary medical therapy was US$20,542 and US$4,265, respectively. The corresponding ICER for stent versus medical treatment alone was US$1,416,268.

Conclusion: The reduced risk of stroke following intracranial stent placement is offset by significantly higher procedure-associated net costs. Select procedures in patients with symptomatic stenosis of 70% or greater are more likely to be cost-effective.

Citing Articles

Effect of Risk-Focused Diversified Safety Management Mode in Patients with Major Artery Stent Implantation.

Shao Y, Wu C, Mao Y, Li D, Wang Y, Zhu K Emerg Med Int. 2022; 2022:1284254.

PMID: 36212997 PMC: 9546671. DOI: 10.1155/2022/1284254.

References
1.
Jiang W, Wang Y, Du B, Wang S, Wang G, Jin M . Stenting of symptomatic M1 stenosis of middle cerebral artery: an initial experience of 40 patients. Stroke. 2004; 35(6):1375-80. DOI: 10.1161/01.STR.0000128018.57526.3a. View

2.
Mori T, Kazita K, Chokyu K, Mima T, Mori K . Short-term arteriographic and clinical outcome after cerebral angioplasty and stenting for intracranial vertebrobasilar and carotid atherosclerotic occlusive disease. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2000; 21(2):249-54. PMC: 7975354. View

3.
Qureshi A, Tariq N, Hassan A, Vazquez G, Hussein H, Suri M . Predictors and timing of neurological complications following intracranial angioplasty and/or stent placement. Neurosurgery. 2010; 68(1):53-60. DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e3181fc5f0a. View

4.
Nishimaru K, MCHENRY Jr L, Toole J . Cerebral angiographic and clinical differences in carotid system transient ischemic attacks between American Caucasian and Japanese patients. Stroke. 1984; 15(1):56-9. DOI: 10.1161/01.str.15.1.56. View

5.
Maud A, Vazquez G, Nyman J, Lakshminarayan K, Anderson D, Qureshi A . Cost-effectiveness analysis of protected carotid artery stent placement versus endarterectomy in high-risk patients. J Endovasc Ther. 2010; 17(2):224-9. DOI: 10.1583/09-2938.1. View