TY - JOUR
T1 - Cost-effectiveness of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest
T2 - A multi-centre prospective cohort study
AU - Matsuoka, Yoshinori
AU - Goto, Rei
AU - Atsumi, Takahiro
AU - Morimura, Naoto
AU - Nagao, Ken
AU - Tahara, Yoshio
AU - Asai, Yasufumi
AU - Yokota, Hiroyuki
AU - Ariyoshi, Koichi
AU - Yamamoto, Yosuke
AU - Sakamoto, Tetsuya
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was supported by a grant from the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare . The SAVE-J study was registered on the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000001403).
Funding Information:
This study was supported by a grant from the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. The SAVE-J study was registered on the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000001403).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 The Author(s)
PY - 2020/12
Y1 - 2020/12
N2 - Aim: Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) is an evolving resuscitative method for refractory cardiopulmonary arrests. However, considering the substantial healthcare costs and resources involved, there is an urgent need for a full economic evaluation. We therefore assessed the cost-effectiveness of ECPR for refractory ventricular fibrillation/pulseless ventricular tachycardia (VF/pVT). Methods: We developed a decision model to estimate lifetime costs and outcomes for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients with VF/pVT who received either ECPR or conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) was used as the main outcome measure. This model was a combination of a decision tree model for the acute phase based on a prospective observational study (SAVE-J study), together with a Markov model for long-term follow-up periods extrapolated from published data. To evaluate the robustness of this model, we conducted a comprehensive deterministic sensitivity analysis (DSA) and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA). Results: ECPR was cost-effective, with an incremental cost of ¥3,521,189 (Є30,227), an incremental effectiveness of 1.34 QALY, and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of ¥2,619,692 (Є22,489) per QALY gained. DSA revealed that the present model was most sensitive to probability of Cerebral Performance Category 1 after ECPR (¥2,153,977/QALY to ¥3,186,475/QALY), patient age (¥2,170,112/QALY to ¥3,334,252/QALY), and long-term medical cost for modified Rankin Scale 0 (¥2,280,352/QALY to ¥2,855,330/QALY). PSA indicated ECPR to be cost-effective and below the willingness-to-pay threshold of ¥5,000,000 with an 86.7 % possibility. Conclusions: ECPR was an economically acceptable resuscitative strategy, and the results of the present study were robust even when considering the uncertainty of all parameters.
AB - Aim: Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) is an evolving resuscitative method for refractory cardiopulmonary arrests. However, considering the substantial healthcare costs and resources involved, there is an urgent need for a full economic evaluation. We therefore assessed the cost-effectiveness of ECPR for refractory ventricular fibrillation/pulseless ventricular tachycardia (VF/pVT). Methods: We developed a decision model to estimate lifetime costs and outcomes for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients with VF/pVT who received either ECPR or conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) was used as the main outcome measure. This model was a combination of a decision tree model for the acute phase based on a prospective observational study (SAVE-J study), together with a Markov model for long-term follow-up periods extrapolated from published data. To evaluate the robustness of this model, we conducted a comprehensive deterministic sensitivity analysis (DSA) and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA). Results: ECPR was cost-effective, with an incremental cost of ¥3,521,189 (Є30,227), an incremental effectiveness of 1.34 QALY, and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of ¥2,619,692 (Є22,489) per QALY gained. DSA revealed that the present model was most sensitive to probability of Cerebral Performance Category 1 after ECPR (¥2,153,977/QALY to ¥3,186,475/QALY), patient age (¥2,170,112/QALY to ¥3,334,252/QALY), and long-term medical cost for modified Rankin Scale 0 (¥2,280,352/QALY to ¥2,855,330/QALY). PSA indicated ECPR to be cost-effective and below the willingness-to-pay threshold of ¥5,000,000 with an 86.7 % possibility. Conclusions: ECPR was an economically acceptable resuscitative strategy, and the results of the present study were robust even when considering the uncertainty of all parameters.
KW - Advanced life support
KW - Cost-effectiveness
KW - Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation
KW - Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest
KW - Ventricular fibrillation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85093986062&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85093986062&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.10.009
DO - 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.10.009
M3 - Article
C2 - 33080369
AN - SCOPUS:85093986062
SN - 0300-9572
VL - 157
SP - 32
EP - 38
JO - Resuscitation
JF - Resuscitation
ER -