Cost-Effectiveness of Adding Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy to an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Among Patients With Mild Heart Failure.
other
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 26301323.
- Also identified by DOI 10.7326/M14-1804 and PMC identifier 8105088.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces mortality and heart failure hospitalizations in patients with mild heart failure. To estimate the cost-effectiveness of adding CRT to an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (CRT-D) compared with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) alone among patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction, prolonged intraventricular conduction, and mild heart failure. Markov decision model. Clinical trials, clinical registries, claims data from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention life tables. Patients aged 65 years or older with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 30% or less, QRS duration of 120 milliseconds or more, and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class I or II symptoms. Lifetime. Societal. CRT-D or ICD alone. Life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Use of CRT-D increased life expectancy (9.8 years versus 8.8 years), QALYs (8.6 years versus 7.6 years), and costs ($286 500 versus $228 600), yielding a cost per QALY gained of $61 700. The cost-effectiveness of CRT-D was most dependent on the degree of mortality reduction: When the risk ratio for death was 0.95, the ICER increased to $119 600 per QALY. More expensive CRT-D devices, shorter CRT-D battery life, and older age also made the cost-effectiveness of CRT-D less favorable. The estimated mortality reduction for CRT-D was largely based on a single trial. Data on patients with NYHA class I symptoms were limited. The cost-effectiveness of CRT-D in patients with NYHA class I symptoms remains uncertain. In patients with an LVEF of 30% or less, QRS duration of 120 milliseconds or more, and NYHA class II symptoms, CRT-D appears to be economically attractive relative to ICD alone when a reduction in mortality is expected. National Institutes of Health, University of Copenhagen, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.
Medical subject headings
- Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy
- Cost-Benefit Analysis
- Defibrillators, Implantable
- Heart Failure