Search

Background: Previous cross-sectional studies have identified wide practice pattern variations in the use of peripheral vascular interventions (PVIs) for the treatment of claudication. However, there are limited data on longitudinal practice patterns. We aimed to describe the temporal trends and charges associated with PVI use for claudication over the past 12 years in the United States., Methods and Results: We conducted a retrospective analysis using 100% Medicare fee-for-service claims data to identify all patients who underwent a PVI for claudication between January 2011 and December 2022. We evaluated the trends in utilization and Medicare-allowed charges of PVI according to anatomic level, procedure type, and intervention settings using generalized linear models. Multinomial logistic regressions were used to evaluate factors associated with different levels and types of PVI. We identified 599 197 PVIs performed for claudication. The proportional use of tibial PVI increased 1.0% per year, and atherectomy increased by 1.6% per year over the study period. The proportion of PVIs performed in ambulatory surgical centers/office-based laboratories grew at 4% per year from 12.4% in 2011 to 55.7% in 2022. Total Medicare-allowed charges increased by $11 980 035 USD/year. Multinomial logistic regression identified significant associations between race and ethnicity and treatment setting with use of both atherectomy and tibial PVI., Conclusions: The use of tibial PVI and atherectomy for the treatment of claudication has increased dramatically in in ambulatory surgical center/office-based laboratory settings, non-White patients, and resulting in a significant increase in health care charges. There is a critical need to improve the delivery of value-based care for the treatment of claudication.

Objective: Invasive treatment of intermittent claudication (IC) is commonly performed, despite limited evidence of its cost effectiveness. IC symptoms are mainly caused by atherosclerotic lesions in the superficial femoral artery (SFA), and endovascular treatment is performed frequently. The aim of this study was to investigate its cost effectiveness vs. non-invasive treatment., Methods: One hundred patients with IC due to lesions in the SFA were randomised to treatment with primary stenting, best medical treatment (BMT) and exercise advice (stent group), or to BMT and exercise advice alone (control group). Patients were recruited at seven hospitals in Sweden. For this analysis of cost effectiveness after 24 months, 84 patients with data on quality adjusted life years (QALY; based on the EuroQol Five Dimensions EQ-5D 3L™ questionnaire) were analysed. Patient registry and imputed cost data were used for accumulated costs regarding hospitalisation and outpatient visits., Results: The mean cost per patient was €11 060 in the stent group and €4 787 in the control group, resulting in a difference of €6 273 per patient between the groups. The difference in mean QALYs between the groups was 0.26, in favour of the stent group, which resulted in an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of € 23 785 per QALY., Conclusion: The costs associated with primary stenting in the SFA for the treatment of IC were higher than for exercise advice and BMT alone. With concurrent improvement in health related quality of life, primary stenting was a cost effective treatment option according to the Swedish national guidelines (ICER < €50 000 - €70 000) and approaching the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence threshold for willingness to pay (ICER < £20 000 - £30 000). From a cost effectiveness standpoint, primary stenting of the SFA can, in many countries, be used as an adjunct to exercise training advice, but it must be considered that successful implementation of structured exercise programmes and longer follow up may alter these findings., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)