Mirza, Mahmood

Aim: According to the results of the MASTRO I living systematic review and meta-analysis, use of the EmboTrap Revascularization ® Device in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) results in higher rates of good functional outcomes (90-day modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 0–2) compared with use of the Trevo ® Retriever or the Solitaire™ Revascularization Device. The aim of this analysis was to assess the potential economic impact of achieving improved functional outcomes for three commonly used stent retrievers (SRs) in the treatment of AIS. Methods: An economic model with short-term and long-term costs, representing a healthcare system perspective was developed using a decision tree to simulate a cohort of 1000 hypothetical patients treated for AIS with mechanical thrombectomy (MT) using EmboTrap, Trevo or Solitaire SRs. Based on the proportion of patients who achieved a 90-day mRS score of 0–2 or 3–5 for each device reported in MASTRO I (excluding patients not surviving after 90 days), this model estimated per-patient costs and the associated incremental cost savings. Results are reported from the healthcare system perspective in the US, Canada, the UK, Sweden, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Belgium and The Netherlands. Results: Across all ten countries, the use of EmboTrap during MT was associated with the lowest short-term (ranging from €8412 in Italy to $66,525 in the US), long-term (ranging from €5249 in Italy to $25,757 in the US) and total (ranging from €13,661 in Italy to $92,282 in the US) per-patient costs. The total per-patient cost was higher with Trevo (ranging from €14,601 in Italy to $97,487 in the US) and Solitaire (ranging from €14,840 in Italy to $98,814 in the US). Cost savings were highest when comparing EmboTrap versus Solitaire, followed by EmboTrap versus Trevo, with Trevo versus Solitaire having the smallest cost savings. Results of sensitivity and scenario analyses supported the robustness of the base-case results. Conclusion: Across the ten countries, treating patients with AIS with EmboTrap resulted in lower short-term, long-term and total costs to the payer. With rising healthcare costs and limited hospital budgets, these results suggest EmboTrap proves to be an evidence-based economical choice of SR for hospitals and healthcare systems.

Aim: The aim of this analysis was to assess the cost–effectiveness of the EmboTrap ® Revascularization Device compared with the Solitaire™ Revascularization Device and Trevo ® Retriever for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. Methods: According to MASTRO I, a recent living systematic literature review and meta-analysis, mechanical thrombectomy (MT) with EmboTrap in the treatment of AIS resulted in better functional outcomes compared with the use of Solitaire or Trevo. Based on the proportion of patients that achieved 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores of 0–2, 3–5 and 6 reported in MASTRO I, a combined 90-day short-term decision tree and Markov model with a 10-year time horizon was used to compare the cost–effectiveness of the three devices. The primary outcome was the incremental cost–effectiveness ratio (ICER), representing the incremental cost (in 2022 Chinese Yuan [CNY]) per incremental quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). The ICERs were compared against willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds of 1, 1.5 and 3-times the 2022 national gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in China. Results: Treatment with EmboTrap resulted in total QALYs of 3.28 and total costs of 110,058 CNY per patient. Treatment with Trevo resulted in total QALYs of 3.05 and total costs of 116,941 CNY per patient. Treatment with Solitaire resulted in total QALYs of 2.81 and total costs of 99,090 CNY per patient. Trevo was dominated by EmboTrap as it was a more costly and less effective intervention. As such, Trevo was not cost-effective at any WTP threshold. Compared with Solitaire, EmboTrap was more effective and more costly, with an ICER of 23,615 CNY per QALY. This result suggests that EmboTrap is cost-effective when compared with Solitaire since the ICER was lower than all WTP thresholds assessed. Conclusion: EmboTrap dominated Trevo and is cost-effective for the treatment of patients with AIS compared with Solitaire when assessed from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system and based on the device-level meta-analysis MASTRO I. Selecting a stent retriever (SR) that optimizes 90-day mRS score is an important consideration from both a clinical and healthcare payer perspective in China as it is associated with reduced long-term costs and increased quality of life.