Cost-Utility Analysis of Carotid Artery Angioplasty and Carotid Endarterectomy in Iran
Background: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) are two standard methods for the prevention and treatment of cerebrovascular accidents. Objectives: This study compared these two methods using an economic evaluation analysis. Methods: One hundred patients with carotid occl...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Tehran University of Medical Sciences
2025-05-01
|
| Series: | Health Technology Assessment in Action |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://htainaction.tums.ac.ir/index.php/hta/article/view/310 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Background: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) are two standard methods for the prevention and treatment of cerebrovascular accidents.
Objectives: This study compared these two methods using an economic evaluation analysis.
Methods: One hundred patients with carotid occlusive disease at Razi Hospital in Rasht, Iran, were analyzed in a retrospective cost-utility study using the SF-12 Questionnaire to calculate quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and costs from a societal perspective. This study employed Monte Carlo simulation and sensitivity analysis for data analysis.
Results: Of the 100 patients, 61 were male, and 64 underwent CEA treatment. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CAS versus CEA was US$ 213.6 (± 111.2). The ICER increased to US$ 1625.6 when governmental currency exchange subsidies were excluded from the cost calculations of the two methods.
Conclusions: Both the costs and QALY of CAS are higher than those of CEA. The CAS is cost-effective when the preferred currency rate is applied to medical equipment pricing [compared to the willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of US$ 1431.85]. However, it is not cost-effective when government subsidies are removed.
|
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2645-3835 |