Comparison of costs associated with transcatheter mitral valve repair: PASCAL vs MitraClip in a real-world setting

Jean Marc Haurand; Jafer Haschemi; Daniel Oehler; Yvonne Heinen; Amin Polzin; Malte Kelm; Patrick Horn

doi:10.1186/s12913-023-09966-8

Comparison of costs associated with transcatheter mitral valve repair: PASCAL vs MitraClip in a real-world setting

BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Sep 4;23(1):945. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09966-8.

Authors

Jean Marc Haurand¹, Jafer Haschemi¹, Daniel Oehler¹, Yvonne Heinen¹, Amin Polzin¹, Malte Kelm^{1

2}, Patrick Horn³

Affiliations

¹ Department of Cardiology, Pulmonology and Vascular Medicine, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Medical Faculty of the Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
² CARID, Cardiovascular Research Institute, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany.
³ Department of Cardiology, Pulmonology and Vascular Medicine, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Medical Faculty of the Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany. patrick.horn@med.uni-duesseldorf.de.

Abstract

Aims: We aimed to conduct a clinical process cost analysis to evaluate all upcoming costs of mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (M-TEER) treatment using the MitraClip and the PASCAL repair system.

Methods: First, we prospectively enrolled 107 M-TEER patients treated with either the PASCAL or MitraClip system and compared all upcoming costs during the M-TEER procedure and the associated in-hospital stay. Second, we retrospectively analysed 716 M-TEER procedures with regard to the occurrence of complications and their associated costs. All materials used in the catheterization laboratory for the procedures were evaluated. The cost analysis considered various expenses, such as general in-hospital costs, device costs, catheter laboratory and material costs.

Results: In the prospective study, 51 patients were treated using the PASCAL system, and 56 were treated using the MitraClip system. The two groups had comparable baseline characteristics and comorbidities. The total in-hospital costs were 25 414 (Interquartile range (IQR) 24 631, 27 697) € in the PASCAL group and 25 633 (IQR 24 752, 28 256) € in the MitraClip group (p = 0.515). The major cost driver was initial material expenditure, mostly triggered by device costs, which were similar to the PASCAL and MitraClip systems. Overall intensive care unit and general ward costs did not differ between the PASCAL and MitraClip groups. In the retrospective analysis, M-TEER-related complications were rare but were associated with higher costs, mainly due to prolonged hospitalisation.

Conclusion: The major cost driver of M-TEER was the material expenditure, which was mostly triggered by high device costs. The costs of treating patients were similar for the PASCAL and MitraClip systems. M-TEER-related complications are associated with higher costs, mainly due to prolonged hospitalisation. This analysis provides valuable insights into reducing expenses by modifying the process of M-TEER.

Keywords: Complications; Cost comparison; MitraClip; Mitral valve regurgitation; PASCAL.

MeSH terms

Cardiac Surgical Procedures*
Hospital Costs
Humans
Mitral Valve* / surgery
Prospective Studies
Retrospective Studies