Evidence mapPaperPMID 42550504Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2026

Cost-Effectiveness of Endovascular vs Open Surgery for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia.

Zafar Zafari, Mehdi Najafzadeh, Mufaddal Mahesri, HoJin Shin, Philip P Goodney, Michael S Conte, Mark A Creager, Michael D Dake, John A Kaufman, Richard J Powell and 6 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Zafar ZafariUniversity of Maryland Institute for Health Computing, Bethesda.
Mehdi NajafzadehMedidata Solutions, Boston, Massachusetts.
Mufaddal MahesriDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
HoJin ShinDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Philip P GoodneyHeart and Vascular Center, Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, New Hampshire.
Michael S ConteDivision of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University of California, San Francisco.
Mark A CreagerHeart and Vascular Center, Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, New Hampshire.
Michael D DakeDepartment of Medical Imaging, University of Arizona Health Sciences, Tucson.
John A KaufmanDivision of Interventional Radiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
Richard J PowellHeart and Vascular Center, Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, New Hampshire.
Chris J WhiteDepartment of Cardiovascular Diseases, The Ochsner Clinical School, New Orleans, Louisiana.
Michael B StrongDivision of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Kenneth RosenfieldSection of Vascular Medicine and Intervention, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston.
Alik FarberDivision of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Boston Medical Center, Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Matthew T MenardDivision of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Niteesh K ChoudhryDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Choosing between endovascular and open (bypass) surgical revascularization for chronic limb-threatening ischemia has major implications for clinical practice. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of endovascular vs bypass surgical revascularization. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation used individual-level data from the Best Endovascular vs Best Surgical Therapy for Patients With Chronic Limb Ischemia (BEST-CLI) trial, with the first patient enrolled August 28, 2014, and the final October 18, 2019, for a median follow-up of 2.7 years. An individual-level, continuous-time Markov model with health states based on adjudicated clinical events from BEST-CLI was developed. Rates of clinical outcomes, health utilities, and health care resource use were derived from trial data. Unit costs came from Medicare insurance claims data and the physician fee schedule. The data were analyzed between June 27, 2025, and May 28, 2026. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were incremental cost per life-years gained, incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained, incremental net monetary benefit, and cost per major events of revascularization and amputation avoided over a 5- and 10-year time horizon. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to quantify uncertainty. Results: The cohort included 1434 patients from BEST-CLI (mean [SD] age, 67 [10] years; 1026 male [71.5%]). In the base case analysis, over a 5-year time horizon, the mean per-person direct medical costs were $118 559 (95% credible interval [CrI], $86 978-$157 152) for bypass surgery and $125 535 (95% CrI, $96 205-$160 357) for endovascular surgery. The mean survival per person was 3.84 years (95% CrI, 3.74-3.93 years) and 3.78 years (95% CrI, 3.61-3.94 years) for bypass and endovascular surgery, respectively. The mean QALYs per person were 2.53 (95% CrI, 2.34-2.70) for bypass surgery and 2.48 (95% CrI, 2.28-2.67) for endovascular surgery. Bypass surgery dominated endovascular surgery with respect to both costs per life-year and per QALY gained. The results over 10 years were consistent with those of the 5-year BEST-CLI follow-up. In the Monte Carlo simulation, there was a 93% chance that bypass surgery was more cost-effective than endovascular surgery. Conclusions and Relevance: This cost-effectiveness study found that bypass surgery was more cost-effective in most probabilistic simulations; however, uncertainty remained, highlighting the need for future research to identify subgroups in whom each approach may be cost-effective.

Indexed as

Chronic Limb-Threatening IschemiaEndovascular ProceduresIschemiaVascular Surgical ProceduresAgedChronic DiseaseCost-Benefit AnalysisCost-Effectiveness AnalysisFemaleHumansMaleMarkov ChainsQuality-Adjusted Life YearsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID42550504
PMCPMC13439427

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.