ArticleApplied health economics and health policy2026
Cost Effectiveness of Endovascular Thrombectomy for Large Ischemic Strokes: A US Healthcare Payer Markov Model Informed by Randomized Trials.
Article in Applied health economics and health policy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveEndovascular thrombectomy is standard for acute large-vessel occlusion stroke, but the value of endovascular thrombectomy in patients with large ischemic regions remains uncertain from a US healthcare payer perspective. This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of endovascular thrombectomy plus medical management (MM) versus MM alone in patients with large ischemic regions, synthesizing data from a recent meta-analysis of all available randomized trials.
methodsWe developed a decision tree linked to a Markov model to perform a cost-utility analysis of endovascular thrombectomy plus MM versus MM alone from a US healthcare payer perspective over 90-day, 1-year, 5-year, and 20-year horizons. The target population was adults with acute ischemic stroke from large-vessel occlusion and Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) < 6 or infarct core volume ≥ 50 mL. Clinical inputs came from a systematic review of randomized trials. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Scenario analyses (90-day, 1-year, 5-year, and 20-year horizons) and sensitivity analyses evaluated uncertainty.
resultsOver 20 years, endovascular thrombectomy plus MM yielded 0.44 additional QALYs and US dollars 19,611 higher costs versus MM alone, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US dollars 45,117 per QALY. Endovascular thrombectomy plus MM was cost effective in 59.4% and 94.3% of simulations at willingness-to-pay thresholds of US dollars 50,000 and 100,000 per QALY, respectively, whereas MM alone was dominant over a 90‑day horizon.
conclusionsFrom a US healthcare payer perspective, endovascular thrombectomy for large ischemic strokes is unlikely to be cost effective in the short term but becomes more likely to be cost effective over a 20-year time horizon at commonly used willingness-to-pay thresholds, highlighting the importance of adopting long‑term perspectives in coverage and reimbursement decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.