Abstract
Background Contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) is a complication commonly associated with invasive angiographic procedures and is considered the leading cause of hospital-acquired acute kidney injury. CI-AKI can lead to a prolonged hospital stay, with a substantial economic impact, and increased mortality. The DyeVert™ PLUS EZ system (FDA approved and CE marked) is a device that has been developed to divert a portion of the theoretical injected contrast media volume (CMV), reducing the overall injected contrast media and aortic reflux and potentially improving long-term health outcomes.
Objectives To assess the long-term costs and health outcomes associated with the introduction of the DyeVert™ PLUS EZ system into the health care service for the prevention of CI-AKI in a cohort of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 3-4 undergoing Diagnostic Coronary Angiography (DAG) and/or Percutaneous Coronary intervention (PCI), compared with current practice.
Methods A de novo economic model was developed based on the current pathway of managing patients undergoing DAG and/or PCI and on evidence related to the clinical effectiveness of DyeVert™, in terms of its impact on relevant clinical outcomes and health service resource use. Clinical data used to populate the model were derived from the literature or were based on assumptions informed by expert clinical input. Costs included in the model were obtained from the literature and UK-based routine sources. Probabilistic distributions were assigned to the majority of model parameters so that a probabilistic analysis could be undertaken, while deterministic sensitivity analyses were also carried out to explore the impact of key parameter variation on the model results.
Results Base-case results indicate that the intervention leads to cost savings (- £3,878) and improved effectiveness (+ 0.02 QALYs) over the patient’s lifetime, compared with current practice. Output from the probabilistic analysis supports the high likelihood of the intervention being cost-effective across presented willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds. The overall long-term cost saving for the NHS associated with introduction of the intervention for each cohort of patients is over £175 million. The cost savings are mainly driven by lower risk of subsequent diseases and associated costs
Conclusions Introduction of the DyeVert™ PLUS EZ system has the potential to reduce costs for the health care service and lead to improved clinical outcomes for patients with CKD stage 3-4 undergoing angiographic procedures.
Key Points for Decision Makers
An economic model has been developed to consider the cost-effectiveness of the DyeVert™ PLUS EZ system for use amongst patients undergoing angiographic procedures.
Results of the economic analysis indicate that the DyeVert™ PLUS EZ system is highly likely to be cost saving and result in improved patient outcomes.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Declaration of funding: This report is independent research funded by Osprey Medical Corporation. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the Department of Health, or the company.
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Not Applicable
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Not Applicable
Any clinical trials involved have been registered with an ICMJE-approved registry such as ClinicalTrials.gov and the trial ID is included in the manuscript.
Not Applicable
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant Equator, ICMJE or other checklist(s) as supplementary files, if applicable.
Not Applicable
Footnotes
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Declaration of funding: This report is independent research funded by Osprey Medical Corporation. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the Department of Health, or the company.
Data Availability
All data are publicly available
