Back

Cost-effectiveness of endovascular versus open surgery for chronic limb-threatening ischemia

Zafari, Z.; Najafzadeh, M.; Mahesri, M.; Shin, H.; Goodney, P. P.; Conte, M. S.; Creager, M. A.; Dake, M. D.; Jaff, M. R.; Kaufman, J.; Powell, R. J.; White, C. J.; Strong, M. B.; Rosenfield, K.; Farber, A.; Menard, M. T.; Choudhry, N. K.

2025-09-27 health economics
10.1101/2025.09.22.25336403 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundRevascularization for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia (CLTI) may be performed with an endovascular (Endo) or open surgical (Bypass) approach. ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Endo versus Bypass surgery for CLTI using data from the Best Endovascular versus Best Surgical Therapy for Patients with CLTI (BEST-CLI) trial. MethodsWe developed an individual-level continuous time Markov model that included health states representing the occurrence of adjudicated clinical events from BEST-CLI. Rates of clinical outcomes and health utilities were derived directly from trial data. Costs came from Medicare insurance claims data and physician fee schedule. We calculated the incremental cost per life years gained, incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) and cost per major events of amputation, revascularization, and myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke avoided over a 5- and 10-year time horizon. Sensitivity analyses were performed using a Monte Carlo simulation. ResultsIn base case analyses conducted over a 5-year time horizon, the mean per person direct medical costs were $227,341 (95% Credible Interval [CrI]: $173,075, $291,443) for Bypass and $243,614 (95% CrI: $190,112, $305,605) for Endo. The mean survival per person was 3.91 years (95% CrI: 3.78, 4.03) for Bypass and 3.88 years (95% CrI: 3.68, 4.06) for Endo. This resulted in Endo being dominated by Bypass surgery with respect to costs per life year gained. The mean QALYs per person were 2.48 (95% CrI: 1.11, 3.49) for Bypass and 2.54 (95% CrI: 1.39, 3.40) for Endo, resulting in an incremental costs per QALY gained of $263,973/QALY and an INMB of -$10,109 (95% CrI: -$168,908, $157,433) at a $100,000/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold for Endo vs. Bypass. The results over 10 years were consistent with those of the 5-year follow-up. In the Monte Carlo simulation, there was only a 55% chance that Bypass was more cost-effective than Endo. ConclusionIn the base case analysis, Bypass was the preferred strategy with respect to survival and QALYs, at conventional willingness to pay thresholds. There was substantial uncertainty around these estimates in probabilistic sensitivity analysis, justifying future research to identify subgroups for whom each of these approaches may definitively be cost-effective.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 2%
34.5%
2
European Radiology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.1%
3
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 3%
6.7%
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 21%
5.1%
50% of probability mass above
5
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
5.1%
6
Journal of Medical Economics
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.5%
7
Eye
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.2%
8
Medical Decision Making
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.8%
9
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.6%
10
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.6%
11
Circulation
66 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
12
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
13
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
49 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
14
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.0%
15
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
16
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
17
Annals of Internal Medicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
18
Canadian Medical Association Journal
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
19
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
20
eClinicalMedicine
55 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
21
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
22
International Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
23
BJGP Open
12 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
24
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 27%
0.7%
25
Vaccine
189 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
26
BMJ
49 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
27
Environmental Research Letters
15 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
28
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 65%
0.7%