Cost-Effectiveness
Study Finds pVADs are Cost-Effective for High-Risk PCI
In the era of increasing healthcare costs, the cost-effectiveness of traditional versus emerging technologies is an ongoing consideration when evaluating long-term outcomes. A meta-analysis derived from six studies (Maini et al. 2014) determined that percutaneous ventricular assist devices (pVADs), particularly the Impella 2.5® heart pump, were cost effective in the setting of high-risk PCI, when compared to the IABP. “The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of Impella 2.5 was below the standard willingness-to-pay threshold.”
Of the studies reviewed, Gregory et al. 2013 and Roos et al. 2013 assessed the economic benefit of the Impella 2.5 alone in high-risk PCI patients, as shown below:
Studies Evaluating the Cost Effectiveness of the Impella 2.5 device for High-Risk PCI*
| Study and Study Design | Comparators | Age (years) |
Gender (% male) |
Results and Conclusions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Gregory et al. 2013 Retrospective cost analysis plus cost utility analysis |
IABP --n=211 |
68 | 80.6 |
pVAD reduced major adverse events, readmission length of stay and readmission cost over 90-days Cost effective long term |
|
Roos et al. 2013 Cost utility analysis |
IABP Impella 2.5 --USpella n=175 --Europella n=144 ECMO |
NR** 70 72 NR |
NR 70 81 NR |
pVAD cost effective for high risk PCI compared to IABP |
* Table adapted from Tables 1 and 2, Maini et al. 2014.
**NR=not reported
The authors concluded the cost reductions associated with the Impella 2.5 makes it “a high-value technology.”
COR-0427