Budget Impact Associated with the Introduction of the Impella 5.0 ® Mechanical Circulatory Support Device for Cardiogenic Shock in France

• Published in: ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research Vol. 13; pp. 53 - 63
• Main Authors: Le Guyader, Alexandre, Pernot, Mathieu, Delmas, Clément, Roze, Stéphane, Fau, Isabelle, Flecher, Erwan, Lebreton, Guillaume
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New Zealand Dove Medical Press Limited 01.01.2021; Taylor & Francis Ltd; Dove; Dove Medical Press
• Subjects: Amputation; Analysis; Budget; budget impact; Cardiogenic shock; Clinical medicine; Economic analysis; Economic aspects; Finance; france; GDP; Gross Domestic Product; Health care policy; Health insurance; Impact analysis; impella 5.0; Intensive care; left-ventricular assist devices; Market shares; Medical care, Cost of; Medical equipment and supplies industry; Medical test kit industry; Mortality; Original Research; Oxygenation; Patients; Peptides; Sensitivity analysis; France; United States; Europe; Impella 5.0; cardiogenic shock; left-ventricular assist devices; France; budget impact
• ISSN: 1178-6981; 1178-6981
• DOI: 10.2147/CEOR.S278269

Cardiogenic shock (CS), if not diagnosed and treated rapidly, can lead to irreversible multiorgan damage and death. An economic analysis was conducted to determine the budget impact of the introduction of Impella 5.0 , a mechanical circulatory support (MCS) device that directly unloads the left ventricle, into clinical practice in patients with left ventricular CS in France. A budget impact model was developed to compare the cost of Impella 5.0 with veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) from the perspective of the French national healthcare insurer. Costs associated with Impella 5.0, plus complication-related costs for VA-ECMO or Impella 5.0 from 2019 were included and clinical input data relating to complication rates and time spent on device were sourced from published literature. Extensive scenario and one-way deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the influence of uncertainty around key input parameters. Over a time horizon of 5 years, the introduction of Impella 5.0 was associated with cumulative savings of EUR 4.3 million. The results were driven by the lower risk of device-related complications associated with Impella 5.0. Savings were apparent from Year 1 onwards, with savings in excess of EUR 375,000 projected in Year 1 alone. On a per-patient level, in Year 1, estimated savings with the introduction of Impella 5.0 totaled EUR 616 per patient. Sensitivity analyses showed that the findings of the analysis were robust. The Impella 5.0 device was associated with cumulative cost savings in excess of EUR 4 million over a 5-year period compared with current practice. Projected savings were driven by a lower rate of device-related complications with Impella 5.0 compared with VA-ECMO.