Search

9 p. BACKGROUND: A health technology assessment (HTA) of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (CA-AF) was commissioned by the Belgian government and performed by the Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre (KCE). In this context, a systematic review of the economic literature was performed to assess the procedure's value for money. METHODS: A systematic search for economic literature about the cost-effectiveness of CA-AF was performed by consulting various databases: CRD (Centre for Reviews and Dissemination) HTA and CDSR (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) Technology Assessment, websites of HTA institutes, NHS EED (NHS Economic Evaluation Database), Medline (OVID), EMBASE and EconLit. No time or language restrictions were imposed and pre-defined selection criteria were used. The two-step selection procedure was performed by two persons. References of the selected studies were checked for additional relevant citations. RESULTS: Out of 697 references, seven relevant studies were selected. Based on current evidence and economic considerations, the rationale to support catheter ablation as first-line treatment was lacking.The economic evaluations for second-line catheter ablation included several assumptions that make the results rather optimistic or subject to large uncertainty. First, overall AAD (antiarrhythmic drugs) use after ablation was higher in reality than assumed in the economic evaluations, which had its impact on costs and effects. Second, several models focused on the impact of ablation on preventing stroke. This was questionable because there was no direct hard evidence from RCTs to support this assumption. An indirect impact through stroke on mortality should also be regarded with caution. Furthermore, all models included an impact on quality of life (QoL)/utility and assumed a long-term impact. Unfortunately, none of the RCTs measured QoL with a generic utility instrument and information on the long-term impact on both mortality and QoL was lacking. CONCLUSIONS: Catheter ablation is associated with high initial costs and may lead to life-threatening complications. Its cost-effectiveness depends on the belief one places on the impact on utility and/or preventing stroke, and the duration of these effects. Having no hard evidence for these important variables is rather troublesome. Although the technique is widely spread, the scientific evidence is insufficient for drawing conclusions about the intervention's cost-effectiveness.

5 p. Catheter ablation is an increasingly used treatment for atrial fibrillation but Hans Van Brabandt, Mattias Neyt, and Carl Devos argue that enthusiasm for the procedure is not justified by the evidence on efficacy and cost effectiveness and its use should be strictly limited

618-619

663-668 Aim To assess the outcome and cost of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) in Belgium. Methods and results From a nationwide health insurers' database, we retrieved claims data of all patients that underwent a catheter ablation of AF from November 2007 through December 2008. Based on data on reimbursed procedures and drugs, we assessed AF recurrence using different models. Costs related to the index hospitalization were calculated. During the observation period, 830 patients underwent a first catheter ablation of AF. Two-year follow-up data were available for all patients, with an average follow-up of 30.2 months. Seventy-seven percent of patients were treated for paroxysmal AF. Recurrence of AF was defined as the occurrence of one of the following events: a repeat catheter ablation, an electric cardioversion or an antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) prescription, the latter two taking into account a blanking period of 3 months. Atrial fibrillation recurred in 59.8% of patients after 1 year and in 65.9% of them after 2 years. If AAD prescription was considered as an indicator for ablation failure only if it occurred after a 1 month AAD-free period, recurrence of AF occurred in 37.3% of patients after 1 year and in 49.9% after 2 years. Based on the prescription of rate and rhythm control drugs before the ablation, we conclude that up to 15.8% of patients underwent catheter ablation as first-line therapy. Catheter ablation of AF in Belgium on average costs about €9600 for the initial intervention. Conclusion Since the effectiveness of catheter ablation of AF appears to be less favourable in real-world practice as compared with results reported in clinical trials, and given the high initial cost of the procedure, we suggest to strictly limiting the intervention to patients in whom it is currently believed to be most beneficial, i.e. those with severely symptomatic and drug-refractory paroxysmal AF with no or minimal structural heart disease.

461