Cost-effectiveness of platelet function testing in dual antiplatelet therapy decision-making after intracranial...

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) use is the standard of practice after flow diversion (FD) for intracranial aneurysms (IAs). Yet, no consensus exists in the literature regarding the optimal regimen. Certain institutions utilize various platelet function testing (PFT) to assess patient responsiveness to DAPT. Clopidogrel is the most commonly prescribed drug during DAPT; however, up to 52% of patients can be non-responders, justifying PFT use. Additionally, prices vary significantly among antiplatelet drugs, often further complicated by insurance restrictions. We aimed to determine the most cost-effective strategy for deciding DAPT regimens for patients after IA treatment. A decision tree with Monte Carlo simulations was performed to simulate patients undergoing various three-month postoperative DAPT regimens. Patients were either universally administered aspirin alongside clopidogrel, ticagrelor, or prasugrel without PFT, or administered one of the former thienopyridine medications based on platelet reactivity unit (PRU) results after clopidogrel. Input data for the model were extracted from the current literature, and the willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP) was defined as $100,000 per QALY as per standard practice in the US. The baseline comparison was with universal clopidogrel DAPT without any PFT. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of the model. Utilizing PFT and switching clopidogrel to prasugrel if resistance is documented was the most cost-effective regimen compared to universal clopidogrel, with a base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $-35,255 (cost $2,336.67, effectiveness 0.85). Performing PFT and switching clopidogrel to ticagrelor (ICER $-4,671; cost $2,995.06, effectiveness 0.84), universal prasugrel (ICER $5,553; cost $3,097.30, effectiveness 0.84), or universal ticagrelor (ICER $75,969; cost $3,801.36, effectiveness 0.84) were all more cost-effective than treating patients with universal clopidogrel (cost $3,041.77, effectiveness 0.83). These conclusions remain robust in probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses. The most cost-effective strategy guiding DAPT after FD for IAs is to perform PFTs and switch clopidogrel to prasugrel if resistance is documented, alongside aspirin. The cost of PFT is strongly justified and recommended when deciding patient-specific DAPT regimens.