Mechanical thrombectomy is cost-effective versus medical management alone around Europe in patients with low ASPECTS

Abstract

ObjectiveTo demonstrate, by a cost-effectiveness analysis, the efficiency of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) versus medical management (MM) in patients with a low Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) from the RESCUE Study.MethodsA cost-effectiveness model was designed to project both direct medical costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of MT versus MM in eight European countries (Spain, UK, France, Italy, Belgium, Germany, Sweden, and the Netherlands). Our model was created based on previously published health-economic data in those countries. Procedure costs, acute, mid-term, and long-term care costs were projected based on expected modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores as reported in the RESCUE-Japan LIMIT trial.ResultsMT was found to be a cost-effective option in eight different countries across Europe (Spain, Italy, UK, France, Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden). with a lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness ratio varying from US$2 875 to US$11 202/QALY depending on the country. A cost-effectiveness acceptability curve showed 100% acceptability of MT at the willingness to pay (WTP) of US$40 000 for the eight countries.ConclusionsMT is efficient versus MM alone for patients with low ASPECTS in eight countries across Europe. Patients with a large ischemic core could be treated with MT because it is both clinically beneficial and economically sustainable.