A Prospective Assessment of Renal Transplantation Versus Haemodialysis: Which Therapeutic Modality Is Good Value for Society?

Background: Economic evaluations help health authorities facing budget constraints. This study compares the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and costs in patient subgroups on haemodialysis (HD) and renal transplantation (KT). Methods: In a prospective study with follow-up of 1-3 years, we performed a costutility analysis of KT vs. HD, adopting a lifetime horizon. A societal perspective was taken. Costs for organ procurement, KT eligibility, transplant surgery and follow-up of living donors were included. Key clinical events were recorded. HRQOL was assessed using the EuroQol instrument. Results: The HRQOL remained stable on HD patients. After KT, mean utility score improved at 3 months while mean EQ-VAS scores showed a sustained improvement. Mean annual cost for HD was 32,567.57€. Mean annual costs for KT in the year-1 and in subsequent years were, 60,210.09€ and 12,956.77€ respectively. Cost for initial hospitalization averaged 18,740.74€. HLA-mismatches increased costs by 75% for initial hospitalization (p < 0.001) and 41% in the year-1 (p < 0.05), and duplicate the risk of readmission in the year-1 (p < 0.05). The incremental costutility ratio was 5,534.46€/QALY, increasing 35% when costs for organ procurement were added. KT costs were 41,541.63€ more but provided additional 7.51 QALY. Conclusions: The KT is cost-effective compared with HD. Public funding should reflect the value created by the intervention and adapt to the organ demand.

Percutaneous Treatment of Mitral Valve Regurgitation: Initial Experience with the MitraClip Device

INTRODUCTION: Mitral regurgitation (MR) is the most common valvular disease and has recently become the target of a number of percutaneous approaches. The MitraClip is virtually the only device for which there is considerable experience, with more than 20,000 procedures performed worldwide. OBJECTIVE: To describe our initial experience of the percutaneous treatment of MR with the MitraClip device. METHODS: We describe the first six MitraClip cases performed in this institution (mean age 58.5 ± 13.1 years), with functional MR grade 4+ and New York Heart Association (NYHA) heart failure class III or IV (n=3), with a mean follow-up of 290 ± 145 days. RESULTS: Procedural success (MR ≤ 2+) was 100%. Total procedure time was 115.8 ± 23.7 min, with no in-hospital adverse events and discharge between the fourth and eighth day, and consistent improvement in the six-minute walk test (329.8 ± 98.42 vs. 385.33 ± 106.95 m) and in NYHA class (three patients improved by two NYHA classes). During follow-up there were two deaths, in two of the four patients who had been initially considered for heart transplantation. CONCLUSION: In patients with functional MR the MitraClip procedure is safe, with both a high implantation and immediate in-hospital success rate. A longer follow-up suggests that the clinical benefit decreases or disappears completely in patients with more advanced heart disease, namely those denied transplantation or on the heart transplant waiting list.