Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Level of Evidence in Economic Evaluations of Left Atrial Appendage Closure Devices: A Systematic Review

  • Systematic Review
  • Published:
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

The objective of the present work was to assess the level of evidence in economic evaluations of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure devices, and to test the complementarity of three different tools for assessing the quality of economic evaluations.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of articles in English or French listed in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis registry and the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database. We included only economic evaluations concerning left atrial appendage closure devices. Data were extracted from articles by two authors working independently and using three analysis grids to measure the quality of economic evaluations [the British Medical Journal (BMJ) checklist, the hierarchy scale developed by Cooper et al. (J Health Serv Res Policy 10:245–50, 2005) and the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument].

Results

Seven economic evaluations met our inclusion criteria. All were published between 2013 and 2016. All were cost-utility analyses, and fully complied with the BMJ checklist. According to the hierarchy scale developed by Cooper et al., the quality of data used was heterogeneous. Finally, the mean score for the seven economic studies was 90/100 with the QHES instrument.

Conclusions

Despite the recent development of left atrial appendage closure devices, most economic evaluations conducted here were well-designed studies. Furthermore, different tools used to assess the quality of these studies were complementary, but none gave a global vision of the quality of economic studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lane DA, Lip GYH. Use of the CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc and HAS-BLED scores to aid decision making for thromboprophylaxis in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2012;126:860–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Mahajan R, Brooks AG, Sullivan T, Lim HS, Alasady M, Abed HS, et al. Importance of the underlying substrate in determining thrombus location in atrial fibrillation: implications for left atrial appendage closure. Heart Br Card Soc. 2012;98:1120–6.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ostermayer SH, Reisman M, Kramer PH, Matthews RV, Gray WA, Block PC, et al. Percutaneous left atrial appendage transcatheter occlusion (PLAATO system) to prevent stroke in high-risk patients with non-rheumatic atrial fibrillation: results from the international multi-center feasibility trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:9–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Holmes DR, Kar S, Price MJ, Whisenant B, Sievert H, Doshi SK, et al. Prospective randomized evaluation of the Watchman Left Atrial Appendage Closure device in patients with atrial fibrillation versus long-term warfarin therapy: the PREVAIL trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Holmes DR, Reddy VY, Turi ZG, Doshi SK, Sievert H, Buchbinder M, et al. Percutaneous closure of the left atrial appendage versus warfarin therapy for prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation: a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet Lond Engl. 2009;374:534–42.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Drummond M, Griffin A, Tarricone R. Economic evaluation for devices and drugs–same or different? Value Health J Int Soc Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Res. 2009;12:402–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ciani O, Wilcher B, van Giessen A, Taylor RS. Linking the Regulatory and Reimbursement Processes for Medical Devices: The Need for Integrated Assessments. Health Econ. 2017;26(Suppl 1):13–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Boudard A, Martelli N, Prognon P, Pineau J. Clinical studies of innovative medical devices: what level of evidence for hospital-based health technology assessment? J Eval Clin Pract. 2013;19:697–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Sorenson C, Drummond M, Bhuiyan Khan B. Medical technology as a key driver of rising health expenditure: disentangling the relationship. Clin Outcomes Res CEOR. 2013;5:223–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Martelli N, Devaux C, van den Brink H, Pineau J, Prognon P, Borget I. A systematic review of the level of evidence in economic evaluations of medical devices: the example of vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0144892.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg Lond Engl. 2010;8:336–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Schardt C, Adams MB, Owens T, Keitz S, Fontelo P. Utilization of the PICO framework to improve searching PubMed for clinical questions. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2007;7:16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Teerawattananon Y, Russell S, Mugford M. A systematic review of economic evaluation literature in Thailand: are the data good enough to be used by policy-makers? PharmacoEconomics. 2007;25:467–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cooper N, Coyle D, Abrams K, Mugford M, Sutton A. Use of evidence in decision models: an appraisal of health technology assessments in the UK since 1997. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10:245–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ofman JJ, Sullivan SD, Neumann PJ, Chiou C-F, Henning JM, Wade SW, et al. Examining the value and quality of health economic analyses: implications of utilizing the QHES. J Manag Care Pharm JMCP. 2003;9:53–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Micieli A, Wijeysundera HC, Qiu F, Atzema CL, Singh SM. A decision analysis of percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion relative to novel and traditional oral anticoagulation for stroke prevention in patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation. Med Decis Mak Int J Soc Med Decis Mak. 2016;36:366–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Reddy VY, Akehurst RL, Armstrong SO, Amorosi SL, Brereton N, Hertz DS, et al. Cost effectiveness of left atrial appendage closure with the Watchman device for atrial fibrillation patients with absolute contraindications to warfarin. Eur Eur Pacing Arrhythm Card Electrophysiol J Work Groups Card Pacing Arrhythm Card Cell Electrophysiol Eur Soc Cardiol. 2016;18:979–86.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Singh SM, Micieli A, Wijeysundera HC. Economic evaluation of percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion, dabigatran, and warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2013;127:2414–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Lee VW-Y, Tsai RB-C, Chow IH-I, Yan BP-Y, Kaya MG, Park J-W, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of left atrial appendage occlusion compared with pharmacological strategies for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2016;16:167.

  21. Reddy VY, Akehurst RL, Armstrong SO, Amorosi SL, Beard SM, Holmes DR. Time to cost-effectiveness following stroke reduction strategies in AF: warfarin versus NOACs versus LAA closure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:2728–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Freeman JV, Hutton DW, Barnes GD, Zhu RP, Owens DK, Garber AM, et al. Cost-effectiveness of percutaneous closure of the left atrial appendage in atrial fibrillation based on results from PROTECT AF versus PREVAIL. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2016;9:e003407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Saw J, Bennell MC, Singh SM, Wijeysundera HC. Cost-effectiveness of left atrial appendage closure for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation patients with contraindications to anticoagulation. Can J Cardiol. 2016;32:1355.e9–1355.e14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Health Quality Ontario. Left atrial appendage closure device with delivery system: a health technology assessment. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2017;17:1–106.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Maisel WH. Left atrial appendage occlusion–closure or just the beginning? N Engl J Med. 2009;360:2601–3.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Abrishami P, Boer A, Horstman K. Value in co-creation: subjecting innovative in-hospital technologies to multi-stakeholder appraisal. Int J Hosp Based Health Technol Assess. 2017;2017:12–30.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pharmacy Department, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, AP-HP, 20 rue Leblanc, 75015, Paris, France

    Etienne Nédellec, Judith Pineau, Patrice Prognon & Nicolas Martelli

  2. Université Paris-Sud, Université Paris-Saclay, EA7358 GRADES, 5 rue Jean-Baptiste Clément, 92290, Châtenay-Malabry, France

    Nicolas Martelli

Authors
  1. Etienne Nédellec
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Judith Pineau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Patrice Prognon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nicolas Martelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

EN and NM designed and performed the study. EN, NM and JP analysed the data. EN, NM, JP and PP contributed to the writing of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicolas Martelli.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Etienne Nédellec, Judith Pineau, Patrice Prognon and Nicolas Martelli have no conflicts of interest to declare and no specific funding has been provided for this research.

Funding

None.

Data availability statement

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files (see also Online Supplementary Material, File 4).

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nédellec, E., Pineau, J., Prognon, P. et al. Level of Evidence in Economic Evaluations of Left Atrial Appendage Closure Devices: A Systematic Review. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 16, 793–802 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-018-0429-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-018-0429-z

Search

Navigation