Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T16:41:44.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quality of economic evaluations of drug-coated balloons and drug-eluting stents in peripheral artery disease: a systematic review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 August 2021

Aurélie Etangsale ,
Leonarda Nunno ,
Judith Pineau ,
Patrice Prognon  and
Nicolas Martelli Open the ORCID record for Nicolas Martelli [Opens in a new window]
Aurélie Etangsale
Affiliation:
Pharmacy Department, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, AP-HP, 20 Rue Leblanc, 75015Paris, France
Leonarda Nunno
Affiliation:
Pharmacy Department, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, AP-HP, 20 Rue Leblanc, 75015Paris, France
Judith Pineau
Affiliation:
Pharmacy Department, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, AP-HP, 20 Rue Leblanc, 75015Paris, France
Patrice Prognon
Affiliation:
Pharmacy Department, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, AP-HP, 20 Rue Leblanc, 75015Paris, France
Nicolas Martelli*
Affiliation:
Pharmacy Department, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, AP-HP, 20 Rue Leblanc, 75015Paris, France Université Paris-Saclay GRADES, 92290Châtenay-Malabry, France
*
Author for correspondence: Nicolas Martelli, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

We aimed to perform a systematic review of economic evaluations of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) and drug-eluting stents (DESs) in peripheral artery disease (PAD) and to assess the level of evidence of relevant studies. The purpose was not to present economic findings.

Methods

A systematic review was performed using four electronic databases to identify health economic evaluation studies reporting on the use of DCBs and DESs in PAD. The methodological and reporting quality of the studies was assessed using three different tools, the Drummond, Cooper, and CHEERS (Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards) checklists.

Results

Six articles were included in this review of the 1,728 publications identified. Four studies were cost-effectiveness analyses and two cost–utility analyses. According to the Cooper hierarchy scale, the studies used good-quality data sources. The level of evidence used for clinical effect sizes, safety data, baseline clinical data, and costs was of high quality in general. In contrast, an evaluation of the reporting quality suggested that essential information was lacking.

Conclusion

The present study demonstrates that clinical data used in economic evaluations of DCBs and DESs in PAD are from clinical studies of high quality in general. However, the quality of reporting represents a concern when interpreting the results provided by these economic studies.

Keywords

Economic evaluationMedical deviceDrug-coated balloonDrug-eluting stentPeripheral artery diseaseSystematic review
Type
Assessment
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 37 , Issue 1 , 2021 , e79
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Fowkes, FGR, Rudan, D, Rudan, I, Aboyans, V, Denenberg, JO, McDermott, MM, et al. Comparison of global estimates of prevalence and risk factors for peripheral artery disease in 2000 and 2010: A systematic review and analysis. Lancet Lond Engl. 2013;382:1329–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hiatt, WR, Fowkes, FGR, Heizer, G, Berger, JS, Baumgartner, I, Held, P, et al. Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in symptomatic peripheral artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:32–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Criqui, MH, Ninomiya, JK, Wingard, DL, Ji, M, Fronek, A. Progression of peripheral arterial disease predicts cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52:1736–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parvar, SL, Fitridge, R, Dawson, J, Nicholls, SJ. Medical and lifestyle management of peripheral arterial disease. J Vasc Surg. 2018;68:1595–606.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beckman, JA, Creager, MA. Critical limb ischemia and intermediate-term survival. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:1450–2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olin, JW, White, CJ, Armstrong, EJ, Kadian-Dodov, D, Hiatt, WR. Peripheral artery disease: Evolving role of exercise, medical therapy, and endovascular options. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67:1338–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Conte, MS, Bradbury, AW, Kolh, P, White, JV, Dick, F, Fitridge, R, et al. Global vascular guidelines on the management of chronic limb-threatening ischemia. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2019;58:S1–S109.e33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dake, MD, Ansel, GM, Jaff, MR, Ohki, T, Saxon, RR, Smouse, HB, et al. Durable clinical effectiveness with paclitaxel-eluting stents in the femoropopliteal artery: 5-year results of the zilver PTX randomized trial. Circulation. 2016;133:1472–83, discussion 1483.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zeller, T, Langhoff, R, Rocha-Singh, KJ, Jaff, MR, Blessing, E, Amann-Vesti, B, et al. Directional atherectomy followed by a paclitaxel-coated balloon to inhibit restenosis and maintain vessel patency: Twelve-month results of the DEFINITIVE AR study. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;10. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.116.004848.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shanmugasundaram, M, Murugapandian, S, Truong, HT, Lotun, K, Banerjee, S. Drug-coated balloon in peripheral artery disease. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2019;20:338–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Katsanos, K, Spiliopoulos, S, Kitrou, P, Krokidis, M, Karnabatidis, D. Risk of death following application of paclitaxel-coated balloons and stents in the femoropopliteal rtery of the leg: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7:e011245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schardt, C, Adams, MB, Owens, T, Keitz, S, Fontelo, P. Utilization of the PICO framework to improve searching PubMed for clinical questions. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2007;7:16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Drummond, MF, Sculpher, MJ, Claxton, K, Stoddart, GL, Torrance, GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford University Press; Oxford, 2015.Google Scholar
Cooper, N, Coyle, D, Abrams, K, Mugford, M, Sutton, A. Use of evidence in decision models: An appraisal of health technology assessments in the UK since 1997. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10:245–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Husereau, D, Drummond, M, Petrou, S, Carswell, C, Moher, D, Greenberg, D, et al. Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS) statement. Value Health. 2013;16:e1–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fontenay, S, Catarino, L, Snoussi, S, van den Brink, H, Pineau, J, Prognon, P, et al. Quality of economic evaluations of ventricular assist devices: A systematic review. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2020;36: 1–8.Google ScholarPubMed
Nédellec, E, Pineau, J, Prognon, P, Martelli, N. Level of evidence in economic evaluations of left atrial appendage closure devices: A systematic review. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2018;16:793–802.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kearns, BC, Michaels, JA, Stevenson, MD, Thomas, SM. Cost-effectiveness analysis of enhancements to angioplasty for infrainguinal arterial disease. Br J Surg. 2013;100:1180–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salisbury, AC, Li, H, Vilain, KR, Jaff, MR, Schneider, PA, Laird, JR, et al. Cost-effectiveness of endovascular femoropopliteal intervention using drug-coated balloons versus standard percutaneous transluminal angioplasty: Results from the IN. PACT SFA II Trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:2343–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Albrecht, T, Waliszewski, M, Roca, C, Redlich, U, Tautenhahn, J, Pech, M, et al. Two-year clinical outcomes of the CONSEQUENT trial: Can femoropopliteal lesions be treated with sustainable clinical results that are rconomically sound? Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2018;41:1008–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sridharan, ND, Boitet, A, Smith, K, Noorbakhsh, K, Avgerinos, E, Eslami, MH, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of drug-coated therapies in the superficial femoral artery. J Vasc Surg. 2018;67:343–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Katsanos, K, Karnabatidis, D, Diamantopoulos, A, Spiliopoulos, S, Siablis, D. Cost-effectiveness analysis of infrapopliteal drug-eluting stents. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2013;36:90–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kearns, BC, Thomas, SM. Cost-effectiveness of superficial femoral artery endovascular interventions in the UK and Germany: A modelling study. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e013460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krimsky, S. Conflict of interest and cost-effectiveness analysis. JAMA. 1999;282:1474–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glasgow, MJ, Edlin, R, Harding, JE. Comparison of risk-of-bias assessment approaches for selection of studies reporting prevalence for economic analyses. BMJ Open. 2020;10:e037324.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Craig, JA, Carr, L, Hutton, J, Glanville, J, Iglesias, CP, Sims, AJ. A review of the economic tools for assessing new medical devices. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2015;13:15–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nordanstig, J, James, S, Andersson, M, Andersson, M, Danielsson, P, Gillgren, P, et al. Mortality with paclitaxel-coated devices in peripheral artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2020;383:2538–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Etangsale et al. supplementary material

Etangsale et al. supplementary material 1

Download Etangsale et al. supplementary material(File)
File 13.4 KB
Supplementary material: File

Etangsale et al. supplementary material

Etangsale et al. supplementary material 2

Download Etangsale et al. supplementary material(File)
File 64.5 KB
Supplementary material: File

Etangsale et al. supplementary material

Etangsale et al. supplementary material 3

Download Etangsale et al. supplementary material(File)
File 23 KB