Global Cost-Effectiveness of Transcatheter vs Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Severe Aortic Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Abstract

Backgroud: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a less invasive treatment option for patients with severe aortic valve stenosis (AS); however, its economic benefits in patients with low to intermediate surgical risk remain controversial and vary by country. We conducted a systematic review to compare the economic benefits of TAVR vs surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR).

Methods: We searched 6 databases, including PubMed, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Clinical Trials for randomised controlled trials on the economic benefits of TAVR with different valve types and SAVR in symptomatic AS patients with low to intermediate surgical risk, from inception to October 2023. We extracted data on quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), with ICER converted to 2023 US dollars.

Results: Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria, with the overall quality ranging from intermediate to high. Among these, TAVR was found to be cost-effective in 14 studies, whereas in 1 study conducted in a developing country, TAVR was not cost-effective. When adjusted to 2023 USD, the ICER values ranged from $3,669 to $340,038 per QALY gained.

Conclusions: TAVR appears to be a cost-effective alternative to SAVR in patients with low- to intermediate-risk AS. In all studies, TAVR was associated with a significant increase in QALYs compared with SAVR. Because it is an expensive procedure, the cost-effectiveness of TAVR depends on each country's ICER and willingness-to-pay threshold.