Cost-utility analysis of TAVI versus surgery in low-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis in the UK
Cost-utility analysis of TAVI versus surgery in low-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis in the UK
Background and objective: European guidelines recommend transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI; class IA) for symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (sSAS) in patients aged ≥ 75 years, if a transfemoral approach is possible. Recent cost-utility analyses based on the PARTNER 3 trial have suggested that TAVI with the SAPIEN 3 device is cost effective versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients at low risk of surgical mortality in several European countries. This cost-utility analysis compares TAVI with SAPIEN 3 versus SAVR in patients with sSAS at low risk of surgical mortality from the UK healthcare system perspective, using 5-year PARTNER 3 trial data.
Methods: a two-stage, Markov-based, cost-utility analysis was performed using published and validated methodology to estimate changes in both direct healthcare costs and health-related quality of life for TAVI with SAPIEN 3 versus SAVR in patients with sSAS at low surgical risk from the perspective of the UK healthcare system. The model used a lifetime horizon with a 3.5% yearly discounting factor. Uncertainty was addressed using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.
Results: transcatheter aortic valve implantation with SAPIEN 3 generated an incremental health benefit of 0.47 (90% credible interval 0.35–0.60) quality-adjusted life-years per patient compared with SAVR, at an increased cost of £7999 (£852–£15,035 90% credible interval) per patient over a lifetime horizon (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio: £16,979 per quality-adjusted life-year gained). Transcatheter aortic valve implantation has a 63–90% probability of cost effectiveness based on a £20,000–£30,000 willingness-to-pay threshold. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation remained cost effective across most deterministic sensitivity analyses, confirming the relative robustness of the results.
Conclusions: transcatheter aortic valve implantation with SAPIEN 3 has a 63–90% probability of being cost effective compared with SAVR for low-surgical-risk patients with sSAS. These findings may inform policy decision making in the management of this patient group.
Curzen, Nick
70f3ea49-51b1-418f-8e56-8210aef1abf4
Candolfi, Pascal
2b0c1a9b-3309-44b7-ba8d-ab6622b59d7e
MacCarthy, Philip
1838f7d4-c1f2-45b0-80e0-2fa6117f8217
Lloyd, Clinton T.
668ed780-c6ed-40e8-b801-aeaa8e290efc
Aetesam-Ur-Rahman, Muhammad
Blackman, Daniel J.
1c03cb3f-3b7e-4f4c-94ed-9b438c4e6243
7 November 2025
Curzen, Nick
70f3ea49-51b1-418f-8e56-8210aef1abf4
Candolfi, Pascal
2b0c1a9b-3309-44b7-ba8d-ab6622b59d7e
MacCarthy, Philip
1838f7d4-c1f2-45b0-80e0-2fa6117f8217
Lloyd, Clinton T.
668ed780-c6ed-40e8-b801-aeaa8e290efc
Aetesam-Ur-Rahman, Muhammad
Blackman, Daniel J.
1c03cb3f-3b7e-4f4c-94ed-9b438c4e6243
Curzen, Nick, Candolfi, Pascal, MacCarthy, Philip, Lloyd, Clinton T., Aetesam-Ur-Rahman, Muhammad, Bromilow, Tom, Sellitto, Valentina and Blackman, Daniel J.
(2025)
Cost-utility analysis of TAVI versus surgery in low-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis in the UK.
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy.
(doi:10.1007/s40258-025-01012-4).
Abstract
Background and objective: European guidelines recommend transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI; class IA) for symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (sSAS) in patients aged ≥ 75 years, if a transfemoral approach is possible. Recent cost-utility analyses based on the PARTNER 3 trial have suggested that TAVI with the SAPIEN 3 device is cost effective versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients at low risk of surgical mortality in several European countries. This cost-utility analysis compares TAVI with SAPIEN 3 versus SAVR in patients with sSAS at low risk of surgical mortality from the UK healthcare system perspective, using 5-year PARTNER 3 trial data.
Methods: a two-stage, Markov-based, cost-utility analysis was performed using published and validated methodology to estimate changes in both direct healthcare costs and health-related quality of life for TAVI with SAPIEN 3 versus SAVR in patients with sSAS at low surgical risk from the perspective of the UK healthcare system. The model used a lifetime horizon with a 3.5% yearly discounting factor. Uncertainty was addressed using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.
Results: transcatheter aortic valve implantation with SAPIEN 3 generated an incremental health benefit of 0.47 (90% credible interval 0.35–0.60) quality-adjusted life-years per patient compared with SAVR, at an increased cost of £7999 (£852–£15,035 90% credible interval) per patient over a lifetime horizon (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio: £16,979 per quality-adjusted life-year gained). Transcatheter aortic valve implantation has a 63–90% probability of cost effectiveness based on a £20,000–£30,000 willingness-to-pay threshold. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation remained cost effective across most deterministic sensitivity analyses, confirming the relative robustness of the results.
Conclusions: transcatheter aortic valve implantation with SAPIEN 3 has a 63–90% probability of being cost effective compared with SAVR for low-surgical-risk patients with sSAS. These findings may inform policy decision making in the management of this patient group.
Text
UK SAPIEN 3 TAVI AHEHP 2nd review CLEAN - 10 Oct 2025
- Accepted Manuscript
Text
UK SAPIEN 3 TAVI Supl. AHEHP 2nd review CLEAN - 10 Oct 2025
- Accepted Manuscript
Text
s40258-025-01012-4
- Version of Record
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 12 October 2025
e-pub ahead of print date: 7 November 2025
Published date: 7 November 2025
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 507390
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/507390
ISSN: 1179-1896
PURE UUID: 4dfb1805-f0c2-4113-8c04-91ad0224e552
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 08 Dec 2025 17:48
Last modified: 09 Dec 2025 02:40
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Pascal Candolfi
Author:
Philip MacCarthy
Author:
Clinton T. Lloyd
Author:
Muhammad Aetesam-Ur-Rahman
Author:
Tom Bromilow
Author:
Valentina Sellitto
Author:
Daniel J. Blackman
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics