A Multicenter, Retrospective, Matched, Comparison Study of Clinical Efficacy and Cost-Effectiveness of Caterpillar Arterial Embolization Device versus Fibered Coils in Arterial Embolization

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the clinical effectiveness and costs of using the Caterpillar Arterial Embolization Device (Caterpillar) and fibered coils in arterial embolization cases. Methods: In this multicenter retrospective study, demographic, laboratory, and procedural data were collected on a total of 48 patients between February 2020 and September 2020. Data were collected on 16 Caterpillar placements and matched with 32 controls who underwent coil embolization of the same vessel with a similar size. Clinical and procedural outcomes including type and size of vessels, time to vessel occlusion, fluoroscopy time, total procedure time, and costs were analyzed and compared. Results: Relative time to occlusion was significantly decreased in the Caterpillar group compared to the controls (57 ± 34 s vs. 11 min 44 s ± 8 min 13 s, p = 0.00001611). Fluoroscopy time (6.9 ± 15 min vs. 19.2 ± 14, p = 0.017) and total procedure time (81.0 ± 36 min vs. 111.5 ± 49 min, p = 0.015) were significantly reduced compared to the coil group. Lastly, overall cost of embolic materials was 1050 ± 0 USD for the Caterpillar group compared to 2312.75 ± 1382.84 USD in the coil group (p = 0.000532). Conclusion: The Caterpillar embolic devices appear safe and effective in arterial occlusion. Compared to fibered coils, the Caterpillar device results in decreased time to vessel occlusion, decreased fluoroscopy and procedural time, and decreased costs, making the Caterpillar an appealing choice for arterial embolization.