A Cost-Effective Analysis of Systematically Using Mapping Systems During Catheter Ablation Procedures in Children and Teenagers
The aim of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an extended use of 3D non-fluoroscopic mapping systems (NMSs) during paediatric catheter ablation (CA) in an adult EP Lab. This study includes 58 consecutive patients (aged between 8 and 18) who underwent CA from March 2005 to February 2015. We compare the fluoroscopy data of two groups: group I, patients who underwent CA from 2005 to 2008 using only fluoroscopy, and group II, patients who underwent CA from 2008 to 2015 performed also using NMSs. Two cost-effectiveness analyses were carried out: the first method was based on the alpha value (AV), and the second one was based on the value of a statistical life (VSL). For both methods, a children’s correction factor was also considered. The reduction cost estimated from all these methods was compared to the real additional cost of using NMSs. The use of an NMS during a CA procedure has led to an effective dose reduction (ΔE) of 2.8 milli-Sievert. All presented methods are based on parameters with a wide range of values. The use of an NMS, applying directly AV values or VSL values, is not cost-effective for most countries. Only considering the children’s correction factor, the CA procedure using an NMS seems to be cost-effective. The cost-effectiveness of a systematic use of NMSs during CA procedures in children and teenagers remains a challenging task. A positive result depends on which value of AV or VSL is considered and if the children’s correction factor is applied or not.
KeywordsElectrophysiological procedures Paediatric population Non-fluoroscopic imaging Electro anatomic mapping system Cost-effectiveness
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Research Involving Human and Animal Participants
This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 1.Blomström-Lundqvist C, Scheinman MM, Aliot EM et al (2003) ACC/AHA/ESC guidelines for the management of patients with supraventricular arrhythmias—executive summary. a report of the American college of cardiology/American heart association task force on practice guidelines and the European society of cardiology committee for practice guidelines (writing committee to develop guidelines for the management of patients with supraventricular arrhythmias) developed in collaboration with NASPE-Heart Rhythm Society. J Am Coll Cardiol 42:1493–1531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.Aliot EM, Stevenson WG, Almendral-Garrote JM et al (2009) EHRA/HRS Expert Consensus on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias: developed in a partnership with the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), a Registered Branch of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), and the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS); in collaboration with the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the American Heart Association (AHA). Europace 11:771–817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Hirshfeld JW Jr, Balter S, Brinker JA et al (2005) ACCF/AHA/HRS/SCAI clinical competence statement on physician knowledge to optimize patient safety and image quality in fluoroscopically guided invasive cardiovascular procedures: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association/American College of Physicians Task Force on Clinical Competence and Training. Circulation 111:511–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation; Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board DoEalS; National Research Council of the National Academies (2006) Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII 2. The National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- 21.ICRP (2007) The 2007 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103. Ann ICRP 37:2–4Google Scholar
- 23.Environmental Protection Agency (2011) EPA radiogenic cancer risk models and projections for the US Population. EPA 402-R-11-001. Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- 24.Wrixon AD, Croft JR, Hudson AP, Robb JD, Morrey ME, Robinson CA, Simmonds JR, Haywood SM, Cooper JR, Shrimpton PC, Wall BF, Webb GAM (1993) Documents of the NRPB Volume 4, No. 2Google Scholar
- 25.ISOE European Technical Center (2012) Man-Sievert Monetary Value Survey (2012 Update). ISOE Information Sheet No. 55, General Distribution November 2012Google Scholar
- 26.Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (2016) Reassessment of NRC’s Dollar Per Person-Rem Conversion Factor Policy. Final Report. NUREG-1530, Revision 1, Manuscript Completed: September 2016Google Scholar
- 27.National Research Council (2006) Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII Phase 2. The National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- 29.OECD (2011) Valuing mortality risk reductions in regulatory analysis of environmental, health and transport policies: policy implications. OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
- 30.Office of Management and Budget (2003) Circular A-4. September 17, 2003Google Scholar
- 31.Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (2014) 2014 Draft report to congress on the benefits and costs of federal regulations and unfunded mandates on state, local, and tribal entitiesGoogle Scholar
- 32.Williams SH (2013) Statistical children. Yale J Regul 30(1):63–124Google Scholar
- 33.OECD (2017) Inflation (CPI) (indicator). https://doi.org/10.1787/eee82e6e-en. Accessed 12 April 2017
- 34.OECD (2017) Exchange rates (indicator). https://doi.org/10.1787/037ed317-en. Accessed 12 April 2017