Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia encountered in adult and elderly population and is associated with increased risk of death, stroke, heart failure and reduced quality of life. It places an enormous burden on the patients, caregivers and the society at large. As a chronic illness, AF accrues significant costs related to clinical presentation, complications and loss of productivity. The exact economic burden of AF is difficult to define. Novel invasive approaches to AF aim to cure some patients (through catheter ablation) and/or induce a significant reduction in AF burden in others or to prevent complications such as thrombo-embolic events, but are very expensive (LAA occlusion, repeated catheter ablation). This review will address the cost of conventional (rhythm versus rate control) and invasive strategies in AF (ablation versus antiarrhythmic drugs, LAA occlusion) care and will review the evidence on the comparative cost effectiveness of these approaches.
COHEN, A. and PUYOU DE POUVOURVILLE, G. (2016). Rapport coût/efficacité des traitements médicamenteux et interventionnels dans la fibrillation atriale. Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases Supplements, 8(2), pp. 141-143.