Cost-effectiveness of pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis versus standard anticoagulation in patients with proximal deep vein thrombosis: Results from the ATTRACT trial
Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes
hospitalization; Medicare; postthrombotic; quality-adjusted life years; syndrome; thrombosis
© 2019 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved. Background: In patients with acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis (PCDT) in conjunction with anticoagulation therapy is increasingly used with the goal of preventing postthrombotic syndrome. Long-term costs and cost-effectiveness of these 2 treatment strategies from the perspective of the US healthcare system have not been compared. Methods and Results: Between 2009 and 2014, the ATTRACT trial (Acute Venous Thrombosis: Thrombus Removal With Adjunctive Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis) randomized 692 patients with acute proximal DVT to PCDT plus anticoagulation (n=337) or standard treatment with anticoagulation alone (n=355). Costs (2017 US dollars) were assessed over a 24-month follow-up period using a combination of resource-based costing, hospital bills, Medicare reimbursement rates, and the Drug Topics Red Book. Health state utilities were obtained from the Short Form-36. In-trial results and US life tables were used to develop a Markov cohort model to evaluate lifetime cost-effectiveness. For the PCDT group, mean costs of the initial procedure were $13 600; per-patient costs associated with the index hospitalization were $21 509 for PCDT and $3877 for standard care (difference=$17 632; 95% CI, $16 117-$19 243). The 24-month difference in costs was $20 045 (95% CI, $16 093-$24 120). Utility scores increased significantly between baseline and 6 months for both groups, with no significant differences between groups at any follow-up time point. Projected differences in lifetime costs of $16 740 and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of 0.08, yield an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for PCDT of $222 041/QALY gained. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the probability that PCDT would achieve a lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <$50 000/QALY or <$150 000/QALY was 1% and 25%, respectively. For iliofemoral DVT, QALY gains with PCDT were greater, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $137 526/QALY; for femoral-popliteal DVT, standard therapy was an economically dominant strategy. Conclusions: With an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio >$200 000/QALY gained, PCDT is not an economically attractive treatment for proximal DVT. PCDT may be of intermediate value in patients with iliofemoral DVT. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00790335.
Magnuson, E., Chinnakondepalli, K., Vilain, K., Kearon, C., Julian, J., Kahn, S., Goldhaber, S., Jaff, M., Kindzelski, A., Herman, K., Brady, P., Sharma, K., Black, C., Vedantham, S., & Cohen, D. (2019). Cost-effectiveness of pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis versus standard anticoagulation in patients with proximal deep vein thrombosis: Results from the ATTRACT trial. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, 12 (10). http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.119.005659