Since the inception of arteriovenous grafts (AVG) as a novel technique, there has been greater emphasis on the assessment of outcomes rather than costs. Gross-costing methods over-simplify vascular access surgery and do not reflect the true costs of the service, preventing accurate cost-effectiveness analysis. The aim of this study is to assess the reporting of procedural costs of arteriovenous access creation in economic analyses of vascular access surgery, and to compare the reported costs of the two most performed procedures – arteriovenous fistula (AVF) and arteriovenous graft (AVG).
Methods:
This systematic review included studies reporting a per-procedure cost for AVF or AVG creation. Costs were adjusted from original to target price year using a Gross Domestic Product (GDP) deflator index and converted to 2021 US Dollars using conversion rates based on purchasing power parities.
Results:
The results demonstrate wide discrepancy in the reported procedural costs of arteriovenous access creation. Most of the data represents retrospectively observed costs rather than prospective data collected on an intention-to-treat basis. Charges are frequently presented in lieu of costs, and aggregated gross-costing methodology predominates rather than more accurate micro-costing.
Conclusion:
Future micro-costing studies of vascular access surgery are essential to allow a greater understanding of cost-drivers and allow accurate cost-effectiveness analysis.
JagerKJKovesdyCLanghamR, et al. A single number for advocacy and communication-worldwide more than 850 million individuals have kidney diseases. Kidney Int2019; 96(5): 1048–1050.
2.
MannsBTonelliMYilmazS, et al. Establishment and maintenance of vascular access in incident hemodialysis patients: a prospective cost analysis. J Am Soc Nephrol2005; 16(1): 201–209.
3.
Kidney Research UK. Kidney disease: a UK public health emergency. The health economics of kidney disease to 2033. June2023.
4.
Al-BalasALeeTYoungCJ, et al. Predictors of initiation for predialysis arteriovenous fistula. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol2016; 11(10): 1802–1808.
5.
StoumposSTraynorJPMetcalfeW, et al. A national study of autogenous arteriovenous access use and patency in a contemporary hemodialysis population. J Vasc Surg2019; 69(6): 1889–1898.
6.
CharlesJMEdwardsRTBywaterT, et al. Micro-costing in public health economics: steps towards a standardized framework, using the incredible years toddler parenting program as a worked example. Prev Sci2013; 14(4): 377–389.
7.
IsmailIWolffSGronfierA, et al. A cost evaluation methodology for surgical technologies. Surg Endosc2015; 29(8): 2423–2432.
8.
XuXGrossetta NardiniHKRugerJP.Micro-costing studies in the health and medical literature: protocol for a systematic review. Syst Rev2014; 3: 47.
9.
ChristouCDAthanasiadouECToouliasAI, et al. The process of estimating the cost of surgery: providing a practical framework for surgeons. Int J Health Plann Manage2022; 37(4): 1926–1940.
10.
UK Government Department of Health. National Reference Costs. London, 2021. 2021.
11.
MoherDShamseerLClarkeM, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev2015; 4(1): 1.
12.
HoffmannTCOxmanADIoannidisJP, et al. Enhancing the usability of systematic reviews by improving the consideration and description of interventions. BMJ2017; 358: j2998.
13.
ShemiltIJamesTMarcelloM.A web-based tool for adjusting costs to a specific target currency and price year. Evid Policy2010; 6(1): 51–59.
14.
AitkenEIqbalKThomsonP, et al. Are early cannulation arteriovenous grafts (ecAVG) a viable alternative to tunnelled central venous catheters (TCVCs)? An observational “virtual study” and budget impact analysis. J Vasc Access2016; 17(3): 220–228.
15.
WongTSChenQZhongQ, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of autogenous arteriovenous fistula, arteriovenous graft, and tunneled-cuffed catheter for hemodialysis in patients with end-stage kidney disease in Southern China. J Vasc Access2024; 25(3): 953–962.
16.
XueHLacsonEJrWangW, et al. Choice of vascular access among incident hemodialysis patients: a decision and cost-utility analysis. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol2010; 5(12): 2289–2296.
17.
KosaSDGafniAThabaneL, et al. The effect of risk of maturation failure and access type on arteriovenous access-related costs among hemodialysis patients. Kidney3602020; 1(4): 248–257.
18.
ShenoySWoodwardRS.Economic impact of the beneficial effect of changing vascular anastomotic technique in hemodialysis access. Vasc Endovascular Surg2005; 39(5): 437–443.
19.
ArnoldRJGHanYBalakrishnanR, et al. Comparison between surgical and endovascular hemodialysis arteriovenous fistula interventions and associated costs. J Vasc Interv Radiol2018; 29(11): 1558–1566.e2.
20.
AitkenELJacksonAJHameedH, et al. Cephalic arch stenosis: angioplasty to preserve a brachiocephalic fistula or new brachiobasilic fistula? A cost-effectiveness study. Ren Fail2014; 36(10): 1550–1558.
21.
HallRKMyersERRosasSE, et al. Choice of hemodialysis access in older adults: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol2017; 12(6): 947–954.
22.
Jiménez-AlmonacidPGrussELasalaM, et al. Reparación quirúrgica urgente de las fístulas arteriovenosas para hemodiálisis trombosadas: repercusión económica de la implantación de un protocolo de actuación en un área sanitaria. Nefrología (Madrid)2014; 34: 377–382.
23.
HoPBinte Taufiq Chong Ah HooNNFChengYX, et al. The clinical journey and healthcare resources required for dialysis access of end-stage kidney disease patients during their first year of hemodialysis. J Vasc Access2024; 25(1): 71–81.
24.
LeermakersJJBodeASVaidyaA, et al. Cost-effectiveness of vascular access for haemodialysis: arteriovenous fistulas versus arteriovenous grafts. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2013; 45(1): 84–92.
25.
Mateos TorresECollado NietoSArenas JimenezMD, et al. Impacto de la introducción de una consulta específica con valoración eco-doppler en el costo asociado a la obtención de un primer acceso vascular para hemodiálisis. Nefrología2022; 42(1): 36–41.
26.
XiongYYuYYangY, et al. Impacts of age, diabetes, gender, and access type on costs associated with vascular access among Chinese patients on hemodialysis. Int J Artif Organs2021; 44(5): 302–309.
27.
WagnerJKFishLWeisbordSD, et al. Hemodialysis access cost comparisons among incident tunneled catheter patients. J Vasc Access2020; 21(3): 308–313.
28.
Al-BalasAShariffSLeeT, et al. Clinical outcomes and economic impact of starting hemodialysis with a catheter after predialysis arteriovenous fistula creation. Am J Nephrol2019; 50(3): 221–227.
29.
RognoniCTozziMTarriconeR.Endovascular versus surgical creation of arteriovenous fistula in hemodialysis patients: cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses. J Vasc Access2021; 22(1): 48–57.
30.
LeeHSJuYSSongYR, et al. Current treatment status and medical costs for hemodialysis vascular access based on analysis of the Korean Health Insurance Database. Korean J Intern Med2018; 33(6): 1160–1168.
31.
SorberRCannerJKAbularrageCJ, et al. Quantifying the costs of creating and maintaining hemodialysis access in an all-payer rate-controlled health system. Ann Vasc Surg2021; 76: 142–151.
32.
WongCKHChenJFungSKS, et al. Direct and indirect costs of end-stage renal disease patients in the first and second years after initiation of nocturnal home haemodialysis, hospital haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis. Nephrol Dial Transplant2019; 34(9): 1565–1576.
33.
ShechterSMChandlerTSkandariMR, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of vascular access referral policies in CKD. Am J Kidney Dis2017; 70(3): 368–376.
34.
DrewDALokCECohenJT, et al. Vascular access choice in incident hemodialysis patients: a decision analysis. J Am Soc Nephrol2015; 26(1): 183–191.
35.
Al-BalasALeeTYoungCJ, et al. Choice of a second vascular access in hemodialysis patients whose initial arteriovenous fistula failed to mature. J Vasc Surg2018; 68(6): 1858–1864.e1.
36.
Al-BalasALeeTYoungCJ, et al. The clinical and economic effect of vascular access selection in patients initiating hemodialysis with a catheter. J Am Soc Nephrol2017; 28(12): 3679–3687.
37.
BrookeBSGriffinCLKraissLW, et al. Cost-effectiveness of repeated interventions on failing arteriovenous fistulas. J Vasc Surg2019; 70(5): 1620–1628.
38.
RosasSEFeldmanHI.Synthetic vascular hemodialysis access versus native arteriovenous fistula: a cost-utility analysis. Ann Surg2012; 255(1): 181–186.
39.
GyöriGPEilenbergWDittrichL, et al. Preoperative ultrasound improves patency and cost effectiveness in arteriovenous fistula surgery. J Vasc Surg2019; 69(2): 526–531.
40.
FeldmanZMLiuLBAbramowitzSD, et al. Hemodialysis vascular access: rising costs as a surrogate marker for patency and function of arteriovenous fistulas. Ann Vasc Surg2017; 38: 136–143.
41.
TerranellaSFeffermanMZhangY, et al. Economic evaluation of suture versus clip anastomosis in arteriovenous fistula creation. J Vasc Surg2021; 73(6): 2098–2104.
42.
SungurMAKaracaOGEcevitAN.Cost-effectiveness analysis of radiobasilic and brachiobasilic arteriovenous fistulas in hemodialysis patients. Ther Apher Dial2021; 25(5): 628–635.
43.
AitkenEKearnsRGaianuL, et al. Long-term functional patency and cost-effectiveness of arteriovenous fistula creation under regional anesthesia: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Soc Nephrol2020; 31(8): 1871–1882.
44.
OrtegaTOrtegaFDiaz-CorteC, et al. The timely construction of arteriovenous fistulae: a key to reducing morbidity and mortality and to improving cost management. Nephrol Dial Transplant2005; 20(3): 598–603.
45.
AdomakohSAAdiCNFraserHS, et al. Dialysis in Barbados: the cost of hemodialysis provision at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital. Rev Panam Salud Publica2004; 16(5): 350–355.
46.
CoentrãoLAAraújoCSRibeiroCA, et al. Cost analysis of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis access in incident dialysis patients. Perit Dial Int2013; 33(6): 662–670.
47.
MohapatraAYuoTHLowenkampMN, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of immediate access arteriovenous grafts versus standard grafts for hemodialysis. J Vasc Surg2021; 73(2): 581–587.
48.
FinklerSA.The distinction between cost and charges. Ann Intern Med1982; 96(1): 102–109.
49.
TanSSRuttenFFvan IneveldBM, et al. Comparing methodologies for the cost estimation of hospital services. Eur J Health Econ2009; 10(1): 39–45.
50.
BalamiJSCoughlanDWhitePM, et al. The cost of providing mechanical thrombectomy in the UK NHS: a micro-costing study. Clin Med (Lond)2020; 20(3): e40–e45.
51.
DobleBWordsworthSRogersCA, et al. What are the real procedural costs of bariatric surgery? A systematic literature review of published cost analyses. Obes Surg2017; 27(8): 2179–2192.
52.
PotterSDaviesCDaviesG, et al. The use of micro-costing in economic analyses of surgical interventions: a systematic review. Health Econ Rev2020; 10(1): 3.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
