Comparison of curative effect and cost between domestic and imported covered stents in the treatment of non-complex Stanford type B aortic dissection
10.3760/cma.j.cn115396-20221005-00320
- VernacularTitle:国产和进口覆膜支架治疗非复杂Stanford B型主动脉夹层的疗效和成本比较
- Author:
Shiyi WANG
1
;
Xiaodong WU
;
Shengjun CAO
Author Information
1. 江苏省泰州市第二人民医院血管外科，泰州 225500
- Keywords:
Stents;
Aorta, thoracic;
Costs and cost analysis;
Non-complex Stanford type B aortic dissection;
Curative effect
- From:
International Journal of Surgery
2023;50(3):175-179
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the curative effect and cost of domestic and imported covered stents in the treatment of non-complex Stanford type B aortic dissection.Methods:A retrospective case-control study was used to analyze the clinical data of 93 patients with non-complex Stanford B aortic dissection who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in Taizhou Second People's Hospital from September 2016 to September 2021.Ninty-three patients were divided into two groups according to the use of different covered stents during the operation, of which 47 patients were treated with domestic covered stents (observation group) and 46 patients were treated with imported covered stents (control group). Overall response rate, rate of complication, treatment cost and cost-effectiveness ratio of the two groups were compared and sensitivity analysis was performed in the two groups.The measurement datas conforming to the normal distribution were expressed as mean ± standard deviation( ± s), and the inter-group comparison was conducted by t test.The comparison of counting datas between groups was conducted by Chi-square test or Fisher exact probability method. Results:The overall response rate of the observation group and the control group were 93.62% and 97.83%, with no significant difference ( P>0.05); The incidence of complications was 6.38% and 2.17%, with no significant difference ( P>0.05). The cost of covered stent [(62 155.49±10 231.08) yuan] and the total cost of treatment [(95 063.66±20 042.34) yuan] in the observation group were lower than those in the control group [(93 825.37±16 577.04) yuan and (126 035.89±26 186.18) yuan]( P<0.05). There was no significant difference in other direct costs between the observation group [(32 908.17±9 811.26) yuan] and the control group [(32 210.52±9 609.14) yuan] ( P >0.05). The cost-effectiveness ratio of the observation group and the control group were 1 015.42 and 1 288.31, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the control group was 7 356.82. After the cost-effectiveness sensitivity analysis and adjusting the cost of the covered stent to decrease by 10% of the two groups, the cost-effectiveness ratio of the observation group and the control group were 949.03 and 1 192.41, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of control group was 6 604.61. Conclusions:Both domestic and imported covered stents are effective in the treatment of non-complex Stanford type B aortic dissection with fewer complications. Compared with the imported covered stent, the domestic covered stent has lower treatment cost and more advantages of cost-effectiveness, which is more in line with diagnosis related groups reform.
