Literature DB >> 12201792

Cost effectiveness of implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy versus drug therapy for patients at high risk of sudden cardiac death.

Marian A Spath1, Bernie J O'Brien.   

Abstract

The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is a therapy for patients at risk of sudden cardiac death due to ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF). But the apparent high cost of ICD therapy relative to antiarrhythmic drugs such as amiodarone has raised questions about the cost effectiveness of ICD therapy versus drug therapy. To inform this debate we reviewed the literature on ICD cost effectiveness. An electronic and manual search was conducted for articles published since 1980 reporting original data on the cost effectiveness of ICD versus drug therapy for patients at risk of VT/VF. Data on costs and life-years gained were abstracted and studies were grouped into those that used decision-analysis models and those that were trial-based analyses. Cost-effectiveness ratios were inflated to 2001 US dollars. Nine studies were included in the review; five studies were modelling studies and four were part of randomised trials of ICD therapy. Studies varied in time horizon, but all except one indicated that ICD therapy was more costly than drug therapy. Early decision models assumed larger survival benefits than those observed in subsequent trials and therefore had attractive incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in the range of dollars US 27000 to dollars US 60000 per life-year gained. Trial-based studies, with the exception of one small trial, indicated cost per life-year gained in the range dollars US 44000 to dollars US 144000. Stratified analysis shows clearly that patients with a greater risk of mortality due to structural heart disease (e.g. left ventricular ejection fraction < or =35%) benefit more from ICD therapy and therefore have a more attractive cost effectiveness ratio than patients at lower risk. ICD therapy is still evolving over time with implant costs declining and device technology improving. Current evidence is that, in selected patients who are at high risk of VT/VF, ICD therapy can be a cost-effective option. Future research should focus on (i) patient selection to optimise benefits for available resources; and (ii) more comprehensive outcome measures to include health-related quality of life.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12201792     DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200220110-00002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  36 in total

1.  Randomized comparison of antiarrhythmic drug therapy with implantable defibrillators in patients resuscitated from cardiac arrest : the Cardiac Arrest Study Hamburg (CASH).

Authors:  K H Kuck; R Cappato; J Siebels; R Rüppel
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2000-08-15       Impact factor: 29.690

2.  Factors influencing survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Authors:  W D Weaver; L A Cobb; A P Hallstrom; C Fahrenbruch; M K Copass; R Ray
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1986-04       Impact factor: 24.094

3.  A comparison of antiarrhythmic-drug therapy with implantable defibrillators in patients resuscitated from near-fatal ventricular arrhythmias.

Authors: 
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1997-11-27       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Canadian implantable defibrillator study (CIDS) : a randomized trial of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator against amiodarone.

Authors:  S J Connolly; M Gent; R S Roberts; P Dorian; D Roy; R S Sheldon; L B Mitchell; M S Green; G J Klein; B O'Brien
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2000-03-21       Impact factor: 29.690

5.  Identification of patients most likely to benefit from implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy: the Canadian Implantable Defibrillator Study.

Authors:  R Sheldon; S Connolly; A Krahn; R Roberts; M Gent; M Gardner
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2000-04-11       Impact factor: 29.690

6.  Effect of clinical risk stratification on cost-effectiveness of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: the Canadian implantable defibrillator study.

Authors:  R Sheldon; B J O'Brien; G Blackhouse; R Goeree; B Mitchell; G Klein; R S Roberts; M Gent; S J Connolly
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2001-10-02       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 7.  Role of antiarrhythmic agents after myocardial infarction with special reference to the EMIAT and CAMIAT trials of amiodarone. European Myocardial Infarct Amiodarone Trial. Canadian Amiodarone Myocardial Infarction Trial.

Authors:  S M Jafri; S Borzak; J Goldberger; M Gheorghiade
Journal:  Prog Cardiovasc Dis       Date:  1998 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 8.194

8.  Randomized study of implantable defibrillator as first-choice therapy versus conventional strategy in postinfarct sudden death survivors.

Authors:  E F Wever; R N Hauer; F L van Capelle; J G Tijssen; H J Crijns; A Algra; A C Wiesfeld; P F Bakker; E O Robles de Medina
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1995-04-15       Impact factor: 29.690

9.  The relationships among ventricular arrhythmias, left ventricular dysfunction, and mortality in the 2 years after myocardial infarction.

Authors:  J T Bigger; J L Fleiss; R Kleiger; J P Miller; L M Rolnitzky
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1984-02       Impact factor: 29.690

10.  GISSI-2: a factorial randomised trial of alteplase versus streptokinase and heparin versus no heparin among 12,490 patients with acute myocardial infarction. Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell'Infarto Miocardico.

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1990-07-14       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  2 in total

1.  Use of automated external defibrillators in cardiac arrest: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2005-12-01

2.  Implantable cardioverter defibrillators. Prophylactic use: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2005-09-01
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.