Economic evaluation of an ultra-high density mapping system compared to non-ultra-high density mapping systems for radiofrequency catheter ablation procedures in patients with atrial fibrillation
Bernardo Wise 1 , Ramón Albarrán-Rincón 1 , Alfonso De Lossada Juste 2 , Ane Erkiaga Aio 2 , Armin Klesius 2 , Eliana Biundo 3 , Edith Maes 3 , Audrey Cordon 3 , Pablo Ramos 1 , Ignacio García-Bolao 4
Purpose: Advanced non-fluoroscopic mapping systems for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have shown to be an effective treatment of atrial fibrillation. This study analyzes the resource usage and subsequent costs associated with the implementation of an ultra-high density mapping system (UHDMS) compared to non-ultra-high density mapping systems (NUHDMS).
Methods: This retrospective observational study included 120 patients (18 years or older) with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation who underwent RFA for de novo pulmonary vein isolation guided either by an UHDMS (n=63) or NUHDMS (n=57) for their index procedure. We compared patient characteristics, short- and long-term procedural outcomes, resource usage, and clinical outcomes followed up to 16 months between the two treatment groups. The cost analysis was conducted from the perspective of a single center in Spain (Clinica Universidad de Navarra).
Results: Neither baseline patient characteristics nor complication rate differed between groups. Repeat RFAs following recurrent arrhythmia at 16 months was lower in the UHDMS patient group than in the NUHDMS group (6 vs. 14, respectively; P=0.027). The average total cost per patient was €1,600 lower in the UHDMS group, compared to the NUHDMS group (€11,061 and €12,661, respectively; P=0.03).
Conclusion: In patients treated with an NUHDMS, 25% had a repeat ablation for recurrent arrhythmia, whereas only 9% of patients treated with a UHDMS had one (61% relative risk reduction), resulting in an average cost saving per patient of €1,600.