Bernardo Wise1, Ramón Albarrán-Rincón1, Alfonso De Lossada Juste2, Ane Erkiaga Aio2, Armin Klesius2, Eliana Biundo3, Edith Maes3, Audrey Cordon3, Pablo Ramos1, Ignacio García-Bolao4. 1. Department of Cardiology and Cardiac Surgery, IdiSNA, Navarra Institute for Health Research, Arrhythmia Unit, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, University of Navarra and School of Medicine, Avda Pio XII sn, 31008, Pamplona, Spain. 2. Boston Scientific Corporation, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Health Economics and Outcomes Research Team, Deloitte Consulting & Advisory, Zaventem, Belgium. 4. Department of Cardiology and Cardiac Surgery, IdiSNA, Navarra Institute for Health Research, Arrhythmia Unit, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, University of Navarra and School of Medicine, Avda Pio XII sn, 31008, Pamplona, Spain. igarciab@unav.es.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Advanced non-fluoroscopic mapping systems for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have shown to be an effective treatment of atrial fibrillation. This study analyzes the resource usage and subsequent costs associated with the implementation of an ultra-high density mapping system (UHDMS) compared to non-ultra-high density mapping systems (NUHDMS). METHODS: This retrospective observational study included 120 patients (18 years or older) with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation who underwent RFA for de novo pulmonary vein isolation guided either by an UHDMS (n=63) or NUHDMS (n=57) for their index procedure. We compared patient characteristics, short- and long-term procedural outcomes, resource usage, and clinical outcomes followed up to 16 months between the two treatment groups. The cost analysis was conducted from the perspective of a single center in Spain (Clinica Universidad de Navarra). RESULTS: Neither baseline patient characteristics nor complication rate differed between groups. Repeat RFAs following recurrent arrhythmia at 16 months was lower in the UHDMS patient group than in the NUHDMS group (6 vs. 14, respectively; P=0.027). The average total cost per patient was €1,600 lower in the UHDMS group, compared to the NUHDMS group (€11,061 and €12,661, respectively; P=0.03). CONCLUSION: In patients treated with an NUHDMS, 25% had a repeat ablation for recurrent arrhythmia, whereas only 9% of patients treated with a UHDMS had one (61% relative risk reduction), resulting in an average cost saving per patient of €1,600.
PURPOSE: Advanced non-fluoroscopic mapping systems for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have shown to be an effective treatment of atrial fibrillation. This study analyzes the resource usage and subsequent costs associated with the implementation of an ultra-high density mapping system (UHDMS) compared to non-ultra-high density mapping systems (NUHDMS). METHODS: This retrospective observational study included 120 patients (18 years or older) with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation who underwent RFA for de novo pulmonary vein isolation guided either by an UHDMS (n=63) or NUHDMS (n=57) for their index procedure. We compared patient characteristics, short- and long-term procedural outcomes, resource usage, and clinical outcomes followed up to 16 months between the two treatment groups. The cost analysis was conducted from the perspective of a single center in Spain (Clinica Universidad de Navarra). RESULTS: Neither baseline patient characteristics nor complication rate differed between groups. Repeat RFAs following recurrent arrhythmia at 16 months was lower in the UHDMS patient group than in the NUHDMS group (6 vs. 14, respectively; P=0.027). The average total cost per patient was €1,600 lower in the UHDMS group, compared to the NUHDMS group (€11,061 and €12,661, respectively; P=0.03). CONCLUSION: In patients treated with an NUHDMS, 25% had a repeat ablation for recurrent arrhythmia, whereas only 9% of patients treated with a UHDMS had one (61% relative risk reduction), resulting in an average cost saving per patient of €1,600.