Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39557556›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2024

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement in Chinese patients with intermediate and high surgical risk for aortic stenosis: a decision analysis on effect, affordability and cost-effectiveness.

Tongfeng Chen, Chuanyu Gao, Chong Chen, Yipin Zhao, Jiangtao Cheng, Xiaoyan Guo, Dan Hu, Chang Liu, Yuhao Liu

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Tongfeng ChenDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Central China Cardiovascular Hospital, Zhengzhou, Henan, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0358-9247
Chuanyu GaoDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Central China Cardiovascular Hospital, Zhengzhou, Henan, China.
Chong ChenDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Central China Cardiovascular Hospital, Zhengzhou, Henan, China.
Yipin ZhaoDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Central China Cardiovascular Hospital, Zhengzhou, Henan, China.
Jiangtao ChengDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Central China Cardiovascular Hospital, Zhengzhou, Henan, China.
Xiaoyan GuoDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Central China Cardiovascular Hospital, Zhengzhou, Henan, China.
Dan HuDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Central China Cardiovascular Hospital, Zhengzhou, Henan, China.
Chang LiuDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Central China Cardiovascular Hospital, Zhengzhou, Henan, China.
Yuhao LiuDepartment of Cardiology, Fuwai Central China Cardiovascular Hospital, Zhengzhou, Henan, China Liuyhfwhz@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveExamine the cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for Chinese patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) at intermediate and high surgical risk.

designA two-phase model, comprising a 1-month decision tree to simulate perioperative outcomes and a 5-year Markov model with monthly cycles to simulate long-term outcomes, has been developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TAVI compared with SAVR for Chinese patients with AS at intermediate and high risk. The event rates for both phases are sourced from the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves IA and IIA trials, while the cost inputs and utility values are sourced from local sources or published literature. Adjustments for inflation were made using consumer price indexes for healthcare to enhance precision. To ensure the reliability and robustness of the model, sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess their impact on outcomes.

settingChina healthcare system perspective.

participantsA hypothetical cohort of Chinese patients with AS in intermediate and high surgical risk.

interventionsTAVI versus SAVR. OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life-years gained and incremental cost-effectiveness Ratio (ICER).

resultFor both intermediate- and high-risk AS patients, offering TAVR resulted in high healthcare costs but moderate benefits compared with SAVR. Specifically, in the intermediate-risk population, TAVR led to a 0.34 QALY increase over SAVR, with an incremental cost of $16 707.58, resulting in an ICER of $49 176.60/QALY. Similarly, in the high-risk population, TAVR showed a 0.15 QALY increase over SAVR, with an incremental cost of $18 093.52, leading to an ICER of $122 696.37/QALY. However, both ICERs exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold of $37 654.50/QALY. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the model's stability under parameter uncertainty.

conclusionTAVI was deemed not cost-effective compared with SAVR for patients with AS at intermediate or high surgical risk in the Chinese healthcare system. Lowering valve costs was considered an effective approach to improve the cost-effectiveness of TAVI.

Indexed as

Aortic Valve StenosisCost-Benefit AnalysisDecision Support TechniquesQuality-Adjusted Life YearsTranscatheter Aortic Valve ReplacementAgedAortic ValveChinaDecision TreesFemaleHeart Valve Prosthesis ImplantationHumansMaleMarkov ChainsDecision MakingHealth Services for the AgedValvular heart disease

Identifiers

PMID39557556
PMCPMC11574406

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.