Clinical Benefit, Harm, and Cost Effectiveness of Screening Men for Peripheral Artery Disease: A Markov Model Based on the VIVA Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Although screening for peripheral arterial disease (PAD) seems obvious due to its two to three times increased mortality, high prevalence in the elderly, ease of detection, and relatively harmless prevention, the evidence is sparse.

METHODS: A Markov decision model was created to model the lifetime effectiveness and cost effectiveness of general population PAD screening and relevant intervention in 65 year old men. The model was informed by original estimates from the VIVA trial data except for ankle brachial systolic blood pressure index test accuracy, quality of life, and background mortality, which were adopted from the literature. A Markov model was designed for 65 year old men, who were distributed in the starting states of no/detected/undetected PAD. The main outcomes were life years, quality adjusted life years, and costs of healthcare.

RESULTS: Screening for PAD reduced the rates of amputations and stroke by 10.9% and 2.4%, respectively, while it increased the rates of revascularisation, acute myocardial infarction, and major bleeding by 5.5%, 7.1%, and 4.3% respectively. The overall life expectancy was increased by 14 days per invited subject. The cost per life year/quality adjusted life year was estimated at €16 717/€20 673. On the addition of low dose rivaroxaban reduced the costs per life year gained by 40%. If the model ran for only five follow up years, screening reduced relative mortality by 1.71%, suggesting PAD screening accounts for one fourth of the reported overall 7% relative mortality risk reduction of combined abdominal aortic aneurysm, PAD, and hypertension screening.

CONCLUSION: Screening of men for PAD is likely to be both clinically effective and cost effective in a lifetime perspective.