A Cost–Utility Analysis of Mechanical Thrombectomy as an Adjunct to Intravenous Tissue-Type Plasminogen Activator for Acute Large-Vessel Ischemic Stroke

Abstract

Background and Purpose-Mechanical thrombectomy has the potential to improve recanalization rates and outcomes for patients with ischemic stroke, but potential gains could be offset by procedural complications and costs. We evaluated the cost and utility of combined intravenous (IV) tissue-type plasminogen activator (tPA) and mechanical thrombectomy compared to IV tPA alone for acute large-vessel ischemic stroke. Methods-We constructed a decision tree for a hypothetical 68-year-old with a large-vessel ischemic stroke who is eligible for IV tPA. The interventional strategy was IV tPA, a cerebral angiogram, and mechanical thrombectomy and thrombolysis if indicated. Recanalization, hemorrhage complications, and outcomes for the interventional strategy were from the Multi-MERCI study. The medical strategy was IV tPA using inputs from a comprehensive systematic review. Costs were estimated from Medicare reimbursements. We modeled lifetime costs and utilities for disability using a Markov model and Monte-Carlo multivariable sensitivity analysis. Results-For the baseline scenario, the recanalization rate was 72.9% for the interventional strategy and 46.2% for the medical strategy. For the interventional strategy, the symptomatic hemorrhage rate was 8.6% with recanalization and 15.4% without. For the medical strategy, the corresponding rates were 3.6% and 13.3%, respectively. The interventional strategy was cost-effective in 97.6% of simulations (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio $16 001/quality-adjusted life year; 95% CI, $2736 -$39 232). Conclusions-Based on observational data, the combination of IV tPA and mechanical thrombectomy for large-vessel ischemic stroke appears to be cost-effective compared to IV tPA alone. These findings require additional validation with randomized trial data.

The Cost of Materials for Intra-Arterial Thrombectomy

“…Considering clinical and financial recently reported data [20][21][22] , we can argue that it would be logical to perform the endovascular treatment of AIS in regional hospital centres with a stroke unit.…”

“…Cost-effectiveness studies concerning primary 4 and secondary prevention 5 , diagnostic testing 6 , thrombolysis [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] , rehabilitation 16 , management systems 17 and also the informal care costs of long-term care after stroke 18,19 have been published. Few studies have explored the cost-effectiveness of mechanical thrombectomy [20][21][22] .…”

Periprocedural Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Mechanical Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Stent Retriever Era

“…On the basis of the available data, mechanical therapies in qualified patients with acute stroke beyond the window for IV tPA [15] and the combination of IV tPA and mechanical thrombectomy for large-vessel ischemic stroke appears to be cost-effective [16]. Even though mechanical thrombectomy is usually offered later in the course of acute stroke when revascularization is generally less effective, a sensitivity analysis based on the results of the MERCI study [17] showed that, although mechanical thrombectomy carries an approximately USD 6,600 higher cost compared with standard medical therapy, it remained cost-effective [18].…”

In vitroassessment of the trackability of neurovascular intermediate catheters: a comparative analysis

“…Email: jankbt@upmc.edu be increased and mortality rates reduced [13,14]. Furthermore, these procedures have been shown to be costeffective [15,16]. While this represents an improvement over intravenous tPA, the procedures take a significant amount of time and recanalization rates remain mediocre.…”