Cost‐effectiveness analysis of dyevert™ Power XT in patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention procedures in Spain

Abstract

Objective To assess the efficiency of Dyevert™ Power XT compared to the standard clinical practice when used for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Methods A Markov model was developed to estimate, over 3‐month cycles and a lifetime time horizon, the cumulative costs and health outcomes (life years gained [LYG] and quality‐adjusted life years [QALY]) in a hypothetical cohort of 1,000 patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) 3b‐4 and an average age of 72 years. The incidence of contrast‐induced acute kidney injury for these patients is 18.89% in routine practice and 7.78% with Dyevert. QALYs were estimated by applying utilities by health state. Transitions between states and utilities were obtained from the literature. Overall all‐cause and state‐specific mortality were considered. The total cost (€2,022) estimated with the National Health System perspective included cost of the procedure and of CKD management. The parameters were validated by a panel of experts. A discount rate (3% per year) was applied to costs and outcomes. Results The use of Dyevert yielded more health benefits (34.60 LYG and 5.69 QALYs) compared to the current standard practice (33.11 LYG and 5.38 QALYs). Lifetime cost accumulated at the end of the simulation resulted €30,211/patient with Dyevert and €33,895/patient with current standard clinical practice. Conclusions The use of Dyevert™ Power XT resulted dominant option, due to its higher effectiveness and lower cost as compared to standard clinical practice and, therefore, a preferred option in patients with CKD stages 3b‐4 undergoing PCI in Spain.

Navigating nephrotoxic waters: A comprehensive overview of contrast-induced acute kidney injury prevention

“…Notably, a UK-based cost-utility analysis revealed significant cost savings and improved quality of life with the use of DyeVert[ 172 ]. Such findings were replicated in a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients with stage 3b-4 CKD undergoing PCI, with DyeVert being more effective and less costly compared to standard of care[ 173 ]. Last but not least, we should mention the results of the latest RCT of 550 patients with acute MI (74.5% with STEMI) undergoing PCI, who were randomized to either CM volume reduction through the DyeVert system or manual/automatic CM injection syringe[ 174 ].…”