Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 9, 2026

Catheter Ablation in Combination With Left Atrial Appendage Closure for Atrial Fibrillation
Published on: February 26, 2013
Cost-Effectiveness of Anticoagulation Treatment for Subclinical Device-Detected Atrial Fibrillation
Aleksi K Winstén1,2, Ville Langén3, K E Juhani Airaksinen4
1Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Insights
Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) therapy for device-detected atrial fibrillation (AF) is generally not cost-effective. Further research is needed to determine cost-effectiveness in patients with high CHA2DS2-VASc scores.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Medicine
- Health Economics
- Medical Technology Assessment
Background:
- Subclinical, device-detected atrial fibrillation (AF) presents a clinical equipoise regarding anticoagulation for stroke prevention.
- The cost-effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in this population is currently unknown.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of initiating DOAC therapy compared to no anticoagulation in patients with device-detected AF.
- To inform clinical decision-making and health policy regarding anticoagulation strategies for subclinical AF.
Main Methods:
- A 10-year Markov model was utilized for cost-effectiveness analysis from a health system perspective.
- Data from randomized clinical trials and Nordic healthcare databases informed baseline characteristics, risks, and costs.
- Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed, considering meta-analyses of DOAC efficacy and 95% confidence intervals.
Main Results:
- DOAC therapy was associated with a mean incremental cost of €1676 and 0.016 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) per patient in the base case, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €105,293 per QALY.
- Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated DOAC therapy was cost-effective in 35% of simulations and dominated in 38%, with a mean ICER of €176,772 per QALY.
- Cost-effectiveness probabilities varied by CHA2DS2-VASc score, showing higher likelihoods for scores of 4 (41%) and greater than 4 (52%).
Conclusions:
- Routine initiation of DOAC therapy for all patients with device-detected subclinical AF is unlikely to be cost-effective.
- The cost-effectiveness of DOACs in patients with very high CHA2DS2-VASc scores remains uncertain and warrants further investigation.
Importance:
Anticoagulation for stroke prevention in subclinical, device-detected atrial fibrillation (AF) remains an area of clinical equipoise, and its cost-effectiveness is unknown.
Objective:
To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) therapy in patients with device-detected AF.
Design, Setting, And Participants:
This economic evaluation was a cost-effectiveness analysis using a Markov model comparing initiation of DOAC therapy vs no anticoagulation over a 10-year time horizon. Base-case analyses modeled 10 000 patients per strategy with device-detected subclinical AF, with baseline characteristics and risks of stroke, bleeding, and mortality reflecting those observed in randomized clinical trials. The evaluation was conducted from the health system perspective, with treatment and event costs derived from Nordic health care data. The modeling was conducted on March 10, 2026.
Exposure:
The associations of DOAC therapy with the risk and severity of clinical events were incorporated into the analysis, based on a meta-analysis of trials evaluating DOAC therapy in subclinical AF. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis also considered the 95% CIs in the reported treatment effect sizes.
Main Outcomes And Measures:
Incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER; cost difference per QALY gained) from a health system perspective, with 3% annual discounting of both costs and QALYs. Cost-effectiveness was assessed using a €50 000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold.
Results:
The mean age of the 20 000-person simulated cohort was 77 years. In the base case analysis, DOAC therapy was associated with an additional 0.016 QALYs and an incremental cost of €1676 per patient, resulting in an ICER of €105 293 per QALY. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, DOAC therapy was cost-effective in 35% of simulations and dominated in 38%, with a mean QALY gain of 0.016 per patient, a mean incremental cost of €2883 per patient, and a mean ICER of €176 772. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses by CHA2DS2-VASc (congestive heart failure; hypertension; age ≥75 years; diabetes; prior stroke, transient ischemic attack, or thromboembolism; vascular disease; age 65-74 years; and sex category) score showed probabilities of cost-effectiveness of 31%, 41%, and 52% for patients with scores less than 4, of 4, and greater than 4, respectively.
Conclusions And Relevance:
This economic evaluation found that routinely initiating DOAC therapy in all patients with device-detected subclinical AF is unlikely to be cost-effective. Whether treatment is cost-effective in patients with very high CHA2DS2-VASc scores is uncertain.
Related Concept Videos
Venous Thrombosis III: Interprofessional Care
Anticoagulant Drugs: Low-Molecular-Weight Heparins
Anticoagulant Drugs: Vitamin K Antagonists and Direct Oral Anticoagulants
Warfarin, a prominent vitamin K antagonist family member, exerts its effect by inhibiting the enzyme VKORC1 (vitamin K epoxide reductase complex 1). By hindering this enzyme, warfarin...
Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
