Cost-effectiveness of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation for malignant hepatic neoplasms.
OBJECTIVE
Percutaneous radiofrequency (RF) ablation is a promising technique for the treatment of hepatic malignancies. However, its cost-effectiveness has not been established. The purpose of this study is to determine the cost-effectiveness of RF ablation compared to palliative care in the treatment of hepatocellular cancer and colorectal liver metastases. This study also seeks to evaluate the effects of transition from traditional to newly implemented prospective outpatient reimbursement mechanisms on RF ablation cost-effectiveness.


METHODS
The marginal direct costs of a percutaneous RF ablation treatment strategy were compared to palliative care over a range of survival benefits with use of a cost-effectiveness model built from the perspective of the payer. Variables used in the model, including complication rates and procedure efficacy, were obtained from the literature and the authors' experience with 46 consecutive patients.


RESULTS
The cost-effectiveness of a standardized percutaneous RF ablation treatment strategy compared to palliative care was $20,424, $11,407, $5,034, and $3,492, respectively, per life-year (LY) gained when marginal median survival conferred by RF ablation is 6 months, 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years. The RF ablation treatment strategy would be required to generate 6.14, 2.26, and 1.10 months of marginal median survival benefit to achieve strict ($20,000/LY gained), moderate ($50,000/LY gained), and generous ($100,000/LY gained) cost-effectiveness thresholds. Cost-effectiveness was sensitive to the number of lifetime treatments, hours of observation time, frequency of follow-up evaluations, cost of abdominal computed tomography, and decision to perform RF ablation as an inpatient or outpatient.


CONCLUSIONS
Percutaneous RF ablation is a cost-effective treatment strategy compared to palliative care and has likely already achieved the survival benefit required to meet even a strict cost-effectiveness criterion. Dependence on reimbursement mechanism highlights the importance of concordance between policy and RF ablation technology. The results of this study allow flexible application of cost-effectiveness data despite current uncertainties in treatment and survival data and heterogeneity in treatment populations.
Shetty
S K
SK
Harvard Medical School and Department of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Avenue, E/AN-248, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA.
Rosen
M P
MP
Raptopoulos
V
V
Goldberg
S N
SN
D017115:Catheter Ablation / Q000191:economics*; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D006801:Humans; D008113:Liver Neoplasms / Q000191:economics / Q000401:mortality / Q000601:surgery*; D010166:Palliative Care / Q000191:economics; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000191:economics