Cost-effectiveness of thrombectomy in patients with minor stroke and large vessel occlusion: effect of thrombus location on cost-effectiveness and outcomes. Journal of neurointerventional surgery Khunte, M., Wu, X., Koo, A., Payabvash, S., Matouk, C., Heit, J. J., Wintermark, M., Gregory, A. W., Sanelli, P. C., Gandhi, D., Malhotra, A. 1800


BACKGROUND: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) to treat large vessel occlusion (LVO) in patients with acute, minor stroke (National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) <6) and impact of occlusion site.METHODS: A Markov decision-analytic model was constructed accounting for both costs and outcomes from a societal perspective. Two different management strategies were evaluated: EVT and medical management. Base case analysis was done for three different sites of occlusion: proximal M1, distal M1 and M2 occlusions. One-way, two-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.RESULTS: Base-case calculation showed EVT to be the dominant strategy in 65-year-old patients with proximal M1 occlusion and NIHSS <6, with lower cost (US$37 229 per patient) and higher effectiveness (1.47 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)), equivalent to 537 days in perfect health or 603 days in modified Rankin score (mRS) 0-2 health state. EVT is the cost-effective strategy in 92.7% of iterations for patients with proximal M1 occlusion using a willingness-to-pay threshold of US$100 000/QALY. EVT was cost-effective if it had better outcomes in 2%-3% more patients than intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in absolute numbers (base case difference -16%). EVT was cost-effective when the proportion of M2 occlusions was less than 37.1%.CONCLUSIONS: EVT is cost-effective in patients with minor stroke and LVO in the long term (lifetime horizon), considering the poor outcomes and significant disability associated with non-reperfusion. Our study emphasizes the need for caution in interpreting previous observational studies which concluded similar results in EVT versus medical management in patients with minor stroke due to a high proportion of patients with M2 occlusions in the two strategies.

View details for DOI 10.1136/neurintsurg-2021-018375

View details for PubMedID 35022300