ECONOMIC EVALUATION AND BUDGET IMPACT ANALYSIS OF MICROWAVE ABLATION VS. RADIOFREQUENCY ABLATION AND SURGICAL RESECTION FOR EARLY-STAGE HEPATOCELLULAR CARCINOMA IN THE MEXICAN PUBLIC HEALTH SYSTEM
Author(s)
Kyla Jones, BA, MSc1, JUAN VALENCIA, MSc, MD2, Pilar Ceballos, MD3;
1Medtronic, Sr. Principal | Health Economics, Policy and Reimbursement, Northern LatAm, Napoles, Mexico, 2Medtronic, Miami, FL, USA, 3Medtronic, São Paulo, Brazil
1Medtronic, Sr. Principal | Health Economics, Policy and Reimbursement, Northern LatAm, Napoles, Mexico, 2Medtronic, Miami, FL, USA, 3Medtronic, São Paulo, Brazil
OBJECTIVES: Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related mortality globally, with few patients diagnosed in early stages eligible for curative intent. This study evaluates the economic impact of the Emprint™ Microwave Ablation (MWA) System with Thermosphere™ technology compared to Radiofrequency Ablation (RFA) and surgical resection within the Mexican Public Health System for the sub-group of patients who are candidates for early-stage curative intervention.
METHODS: A systematic literature review (2019-2024) compared MWA to RFA and surgery, focusing on Local Tumor Progression (LTP), Overall Survival (OS), and safety. Finding no significant efficacy differences, a Cost-Minimization Analysis (CMA) was conducted from the Mexican public payer perspective. Direct public costs were derived from national sources, primarily the Mexican Social Security Institute´s Diagnostic Related Groups and Unitary Costs, and adjusted to 2025 Mexican pesos. All interventions were costed as integrated surgical procedures, and due to historically different payment structures, MWA costs included equipment acquisition distributed over a conservative representative volume of 26 procedures per hospital annually. The analysis used a one-year horizon for the CMA and a five-year horizon (2025-2029) for a Budget Impact Analysis (BIA), assuming market uptake scenarios from 5% to 25%.
RESULTS: Based on the facility-level estimate of 26 annual procedures, the total cost for MWA was MXN$3,853,625, compared to MXN$7,328,748 for RFA (47.4% savings) and MXN$15,808,806 for surgical resection (75.6% savings). In the BIA, a 5% penetration rate resulted in an initial annual saving of MXN$64.1 million; with a 25% uptake, cumulative savings reached MXN$2,319 million.
CONCLUSIONS: The Emprint™ MWA System is a cost-saving alternative for early-stage HCC in Mexico. Economic benefits are driven by lower consumable costs, reduced surgical time, and decreased hospitalization days. The upfront costs of the acquisition may be recuperated under reasonably conservative volume assumptions.
METHODS: A systematic literature review (2019-2024) compared MWA to RFA and surgery, focusing on Local Tumor Progression (LTP), Overall Survival (OS), and safety. Finding no significant efficacy differences, a Cost-Minimization Analysis (CMA) was conducted from the Mexican public payer perspective. Direct public costs were derived from national sources, primarily the Mexican Social Security Institute´s Diagnostic Related Groups and Unitary Costs, and adjusted to 2025 Mexican pesos. All interventions were costed as integrated surgical procedures, and due to historically different payment structures, MWA costs included equipment acquisition distributed over a conservative representative volume of 26 procedures per hospital annually. The analysis used a one-year horizon for the CMA and a five-year horizon (2025-2029) for a Budget Impact Analysis (BIA), assuming market uptake scenarios from 5% to 25%.
RESULTS: Based on the facility-level estimate of 26 annual procedures, the total cost for MWA was MXN$3,853,625, compared to MXN$7,328,748 for RFA (47.4% savings) and MXN$15,808,806 for surgical resection (75.6% savings). In the BIA, a 5% penetration rate resulted in an initial annual saving of MXN$64.1 million; with a 25% uptake, cumulative savings reached MXN$2,319 million.
CONCLUSIONS: The Emprint™ MWA System is a cost-saving alternative for early-stage HCC in Mexico. Economic benefits are driven by lower consumable costs, reduced surgical time, and decreased hospitalization days. The upfront costs of the acquisition may be recuperated under reasonably conservative volume assumptions.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-05, ISPOR 2026, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue S6
Code
EE82
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Budget Impact Analysis
Disease
SDC: Oncology, STA: Surgery