Cost-Effectiveness of Urea Excipient-Based Drug-Coated Balloons for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia from Femoropopliteal Disease in the Netherlands and Germany

Purpose: Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) for femoropopliteal peripheral artery disease have been shown to be clinically superior and cost-effective compared to conventional percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA). However, few studies enrolled patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). Our objective was to study the cost-effectiveness of endovascular treatment with versus without DCB in CLTI patient populations in the Netherlands and Germany. Material and Methods: Target lesion revascularization (TLR) and major amputation rates were obtained from the CLTI subgroup of the IN.PACT Global study. Rates for “status quo” treatment involving PTA with primary or bailout stenting were derived from systematic literature search. Costs and cost-effectiveness were calculated using a decision-analytic Markov model considering, in the base case, a 2-year horizon, and strategy-specific quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains calculated from survival and health state-specific utilities. A willingness-to-pay threshold of €50,000/QALY was assumed, and extensive sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: Model-projected 24-month probabilities of TLR were 26.2% and 32.8% for treatment with and without DCB, and probabilities for amputation were 2.8% and 11.9%, respectively. DCB added 0.017 QALYs while saving €1,030 in the Dutch setting and €513 in the German setting, respectively. DCB was found dominant or cost-effective across a wide range of assumptions. Conclusion: Urea excipient drug-coated balloon therapy for treating CLTI from femoropopliteal artery disease is associated with improved patient outcomes and expected overall cost savings to payers in the Dutch and German healthcare systems, rendering it a cost-effective and likely dominant treatment strategy.</p

Five-Year Outcomes of the SuperB Trial:A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Heparin-Bonded Endograft to Surgical Femoropopliteal Bypass

Objective: This study aims to compare the 5-year outcomes of endoluminal bypass (EB) using heparin-bonded self-expanding covered stents versus bypass surgery for extensive femoropopliteal disease, including technical and clinical outcomes and health status. Background: The surgical femoropopliteal bypass was the gold standard to treat peripheral arterial disease (PAD) for decades; however, endovascular treatment modalities are now recommended for most femoropopliteal lesions. One-year data of a randomized controlled trial comparing EB with surgical bypass (SB) have shown a faster recovery, less morbidity, and comparable patency rates between the two techniques. To date, long-term randomized controlled data regarding both techniques are lacking. Methods: Five-year results of a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing EB with SB in patients with femoropopliteal artery disease were evaluated based on intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. Results: At 5-year follow-up, primary, primary-assisted, and secondary patency rates were 36.2%, 52.4%, and 68.1% for EB and 49.4%, 72.2%, and 77.8% for SB, respectively (p=0.608). Freedom from target lesion revascularization (fTLR) was 34.1% for EB and 57.6% for SB (p=0.365). In both groups, the ankle-brachial index, Rutherford classification, and walking distance significantly improved compared with baseline without differences between groups at follow-up. Freedom from major amputation rate was 92.6% in the EB group and 96.2% in the SB group (p=0.361). The 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey showed no significant differences between groups. Conclusion: Treatment of extensive femoropopliteal disease with self-expanding covered stents provides comparable clinical-related and health-related questionnaire outcomes when compared with SB through 5 years of follow-up. However, the EB is related to a higher number of reinterventions. Clinical Impact: This present study is the first to report five-year outcomes comparing an endoluminal (EB) using heparin-bonded self-expanding covered stents with surgical bypass (SB) for long and complex femoropopliteal disease. Although the advantages of treatment with EB are mostly seen in the early period after treatment, the outcomes support the use of EB for this indication and seems to be a valid and safe alternative for bypass surgery. Future trials comparing various endovascular strategies may provide further guidance for the development of an evidence-based treatment algorithm.</p