Cost-utility analysis of stenting versus endarterectomy in the International Carotid Stenting Study

International Journal of Stroke

Volumn 11, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 446-453

  Morris, Stephen ^a   Patel, Nishma V ^a   Dobson, Joanna ^b   Featherstone, Roland L ^c   Richards, Toby ^a   Luengo Fernandez, Ramon ^d   Rothwell, Peter M ^d   Brown, Martin M ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Carotid endarterectomy; Carotid stenosis; Carotid stenting; Clinical trial; Cost factors; Economics

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; CAROTID ARTERY STENTING; CAROTID ENDARTERECTOMY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; NET MONETARY BENEFIT; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; UNITED KINGDOM; WILLINGNESS TO PAY; CAROTID STENOSIS; CLINICAL TRIAL; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE COST; RISK; STENT; STROKE; TIME FACTOR; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

AGED; CAROTID STENOSIS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ENDARTERECTOMY, CAROTID; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HUMANS; MALE; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; RISK; STENTS; STROKE; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 84964584264     PISSN: 17474930     EISSN: 17474949     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1747493016632237     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Mackay J and Mensah GA. The atlas of heart disease and stroke. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2004.
2. Townsend N, Wickramasinghe K, Bhatnagar P, et al. Coronary heart disease statistics 2012 edition. London: British Heart Foundation, 2012.
3. Featherstone RL, Brown MM and Coward LJ. International carotid stenting study: protocol for a randomised clinical trial comparing carotid stenting with endarterectomy in symptomatic carotid artery stenosis. Cerebrovasc Dis 2004; 18: 69-74.
4. International Carotid Stenting Study Investigators. Carotid artery stenting compared with endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis (International Carotid Stenting Study): an interim analysis of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2010; 375: 985-997.
5. Bonati LH, Dobson J, Featherstone RL, et al. Long-term outcomes after stenting versus endarterectomy for treatment of symptomatic carotid stenosis: the International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) randomised trial. Lancet 2015; 385: 529-538.
6. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. London: NICE, 2013.
7. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD): Prices and Purchasing Power Parities. OECD website, www.oecd.org/std/ppp (accessed 28 April 2015).
8. Curtis L. Unit costs of health and social care 2013. Kent: Personal Social Services Research Unit, 2013.
9. Information Services Division Scotland. Theatre services. Edinburgh: Information Services Division Scotland, 2012.
10. Gomes M, Soares MO, Dumville JC, et al; the GALA Collaborative Group. Cost-effectiveness analysis of general anaesthesia versus local anaesthesia for carotid surgery (GALA Trial). Br J Surg 2010; 97: 1218-1225.
11. Department of Health. National schedule of reference costs -Year 2011. London: Department of Health, 2012.
12. Ward S, Lloyd Jones M, Pandor A, et al. A systematic review and economic evaluation of statins for the prevention of coronary events. Health Technol Assess 2007; 11: 1-160.
13. Joint Formulary Committee. British national formulary, 66th ed. London: BMJ Group and Pharmaceutical Press, 2013.
14. Luengo-Fernandez R, Gray AM, Rothwell PM; on behalf of the Oxford Vascular Study. A populationbased study of hospital care costs during 5 years after transient ischemic attack and stroke. Stroke 2012; 43: 3343-3351.
15. Luengo-Fernandez R, Paul NLM, Gray AM, et al; behalf of the Oxford Vascular Study. A population-based study of disability and institutionalisation after TIA and stroke: 10-year results of the Oxford Vascular Study. Stroke 2013; 44: 2854-2861.
16. The EuroQol Group. EuroQol -a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990; 16: 199-208.
17. Brooks R. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 1996; 37: 53-72.
18. Dolan P. Modelling valuations for health states. Medical Care 1997; 35: 1095-1108.
19. Briggs A, Clark T, Wolstenholme J and Clarke P. Missing.presumed at random: cost-analysis of incomplete data. Health Econ 2003; 12: 377-392.
20. Briggs AH and Gray AM. Handling uncertainty when performing economic evaluation of healthcare interventions. Health Technol Assess 1999; 3: 1-134.
21. Stinnett AA and Mullahy J. Net health benefits: a new framework for the analysis of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making 1998; 18(2 Suppl): S68-S80.
22. Vilain KR, Magnuson EA, Li H, et al. Costs and costeffectiveness of carotid stenting versus endarterectomy for patients at standard surgical risk: results from the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial (CREST). Stroke 2012; 43: 2408-2416.