Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Cost-effectiveness analysis of current varicose veins treatments.
Epstein, David; Bootun, Roshan; Diop, Modou; Ortega-Ortega, Marta; Lane, Tristan R A; Davies, Alun H.
Affiliation
  • Epstein D; Department of Applied Economics, School of Economics and Business Studies, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
  • Bootun R; Academic Section of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK; Department of Vascular Surgery, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK.
  • Diop M; Department of Applied Economics, School of Economics and Business Studies, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
  • Ortega-Ortega M; Department of Applied and Public Economics, and Political Economy, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
  • Lane TRA; Academic Section of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK; Department of Vascular Surgery, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospital, Cambridge, UK.
  • Davies AH; Academic Section of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK; Imperial Vascular Unit, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK. Electronic address: a.h.davies@imperial.ac.uk.
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord ; 10(2): 504-513.e7, 2022 03.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34450353
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of technologies for treatment of varicose veins over 5 years-conservative care, surgery (high ligation and stripping), ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS), endovenous laser ablation (EVLA), and radiofrequency ablation (RFA), mechanochemical ablation (MOCA), and cyanoacrylate glue occlusion (CAE). METHODS: A systematic review was updated and used to construct a Markov decision model. Outcomes were reintervention on the truncal vein, retreatment of residual varicosities and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and costs over 5 years. RESULTS: UGFS has a significantly greater reintervention rate than other procedures; there is no significant difference between the other procedures. The cost per QALY of EVLA vs UGFS in our base-case model is £16,966 ($23,700) per QALY, which is considered cost effective in the UK. RFA, MOCA, and CAE have greater procedure costs than EVLA with no evidence of greater benefit for patients. CONCLUSIONS: EVLA is the most cost-effective therapeutic option, with RFA a close second, in adult patients requiring treatment in the upper leg for incompetence of the GSV. MOCA, UGFS, CAE, conservative care, and high ligation and stripping are not cost effective at current prices in the UK National Health Service. MOCA and CAE seem to be promising, but further evidence on the effectiveness, reinterventions, and health-related quality of life is needed, as well as how cost effectiveness may vary across settings and reimbursement systems.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Varicose Veins / Decision Support Techniques / Health Care Costs Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Health_economic_evaluation / Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Aspects: Patient_preference Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Spain Country of publication: United States

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Varicose Veins / Decision Support Techniques / Health Care Costs Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Health_economic_evaluation / Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Aspects: Patient_preference Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Spain Country of publication: United States