An Economic Analysis of the Systematic Use of Mapping Systems during Catheter Ablation Procedures: Single Center Experience

Table 2

AV values, expressed as $(2014-USD)/mSv, in different countries, and corresponding Cost Reduction, expressed in $(2014-USD), Cost Effectiveness, expressed as Yes or No, Low and High Cost Effectiveness, both expressed as Yes or No, for SVT CA and AF CA, adopting AV method.

Country [15]	AV-value in $(2014-USD)/mSv	SVT CA Cost Reduction $(2014-USD)	SVT CA Cost Effectiveness	SVT CA Low Cost Effectiveness	SVT CA High Cost Effectiveness	AF CA Cost Reduction $(2014-USD)	AF CA Cost Effectiveness	AF CA Low Cost Effectiveness	AF CA High Cost Effectiveness
Canada	108	252	No	No	No	2573	Yes	Yes	Yes
Czech Republic (min value)	28	65	No	No	No	667	Yes	Yes	Yes
Czech Republic (max value)	137	320	No	No	No	3263	Yes	Yes	Yes
Finland	105	245	No	No	No	2501	Yes	Yes	Yes
Korea	84	196	No	No	No	2001	Yes	Yes	Yes
Netherlands	619	1445	No	No	No	14745	Yes	Yes	Yes
Romania	777	1814	No	No	No	18508	Yes	Yes	Yes
Slovakia	45	105	No	No	No	1072	Yes	Yes	Yes
Sweden (min value)	76	177	No	No	No	1810	Yes	Yes	Yes
Sweden (max value)	386	901	No	No	No	9195	Yes	Yes	Yes
Switzerland	3384	7898	Yes	Yes	Yes	80607	Yes	Yes	Yes
United Kingdom (min value)	17	40	No	No	No	405	Yes	Yes	Yes
United Kingdom (max value)	171	399	No	No	No	4073	Yes	Yes	Yes
United States	210	490	No	No	No	5002	Yes	Yes	Yes
Country [16]	AV-value in $(2014-USD)/mSv	SVT CA Cost Reduction $(2014-USD)	SVT CA Cost Effectiveness	SVT CA Low Cost Effectiveness	SVT CA High Cost Effectiveness	AF CA Cost Reduction $(2014-USD)	AF CA Cost Effectiveness	AF CA Low Cost Effectiveness	AF CA High Cost Effectiveness
United States	520	1214	No	No	No	12386	Yes	Yes	Yes