title: Should endovascular repair be reimbursed for low risk abdominal aortic aneurysm patients? Evidence from ontario, Canada.
abstract: Background. This paper presents unpublished clinical and economic data associated with open surgical repair (OSR) in low risk (LR) patients and how it compares with EVAR and OSR in high risk (HR) patients with an AAA > 5.5 cm. Design. Data from a 1-year prospective observational study was used to compare EVAR in HR patients versus OSR in HR and LR patients. Results. Between 2003 and 2005, 140 patients were treated with EVAR and 195 with OSR (HR: 52; LR: 143). The 1-year mortality rate with EVAR was statistically lower than HR OSR patients and comparable to LR OSR patients. One-year health-related quality of life was lower in the EVAR patients compared to OSR patients. EVAR was cost-effective compared to OSR HR but not when compared to OSR LR patients. Conclusions. Despite a similar clinical effectiveness, these results suggest that, at the current price, EVAR is more expensive than open repair for low risk patients.
authors: Programs for Assessment of Technology in Health (PATH) Research Institute, St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton and Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada L8P 1H1.
authors: Jean-Eric
authors: JE
authors: Tarride
authors: Gord
authors: G
authors: Blackhouse
authors: Guy
authors: G
authors: De Rose
authors: James M
authors: JM
authors: Bowen
authors: Hamid Reza
authors: HR
authors: Nakhai-Pour
authors: Daria
authors: D
authors: O'Reilly
authors: Feng
authors: F
authors: Xie
authors: Teresa
authors: T
authors: Novick
authors: Robert
authors: R
authors: Hopkins
authors: Ron
authors: R
authors: Goeree