Literature DB >> 12521624

Cost-effectiveness of intracoronary ultrasound for percutaneous coronary interventions.

Christian Mueller1, John Mc B Hodgson, Christian Schindler, André P Perruchoud, Helmut Roskamm, Heinz J Buettner.   

Abstract

The Strategy for Intravascular Ultrasound (IVUS) guided PTCA and Stenting trial included a prospectively designed economic analysis to investigate whether routine IVUS guidance intervention is cost-effective. Consecutive patients (n = 269) with 356 lesions were randomly assigned to receive provisional stenting with angiographic guidance only (ANGIO) or with IVUS guidance. The 2-year major adverse cardiac event-free survival (effectiveness) was significantly higher in the IVUS-guided group (80% vs 69%, p <0.04). In-hospital costs for procedural personnel, capital equipment, and disposable equipment were higher in the IVUS group. This was offset by lower costs for inpatient care and urgent target vessel revascularization in the IVUS group. Therefore, the total in-hospital cost was only slightly higher with IVUS (5,245 +/- $2,256 [IVUS] vs 4,776 +/- $2,961 [ANGIO], $/patient, p = 0.15). During a 2-year follow-up, costs for cardiac hospitalizations were slightly lower in the IVUS group, whereas costs for medication and indirect costs were similar. This resulted in identical total costs over the 2-year period (15,947 +/- $8,545 [IVUS] vs 16,103 +/- $9,954 [ANGIO], $/patient, p = 0.89). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for IVUS guidance calculated to -$1,417/major adverse cardiac event-free survival gained. In 55.3% of bootstrapping replications, IVUS was less expensive and more effective. In conclusion, when used in a provisional stenting strategy, routine IVUS imaging is cost-saving half the time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12521624     DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9149(02)03099-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  6 in total

1.  The accuracy of length measurements using different intravascular ultrasound motorized transducer pullback systems.

Authors:  Kaoru Tanaka; Stéphane G Carlier; Gary S Mintz; Koichi Sano; Xuebo Liu; Kenichi Fujii; Jose de Ribamar Costa; Joanna Lui; Jeffrey W Moses; Gregg W Stone; Martin B Leon
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2007-03-17       Impact factor: 2.357

2.  Impact of Intravascular Ultrasound in Clinical Practice.

Authors:  Andres Vasquez; Neville Mistry; Jasvindar Singh
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2014-08

3.  Intravascular ultrasound to guide percutaneous coronary interventions: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2006-04-01

4.  Does intravascular ultrasound provide clinical benefits for percutaneous coronary intervention with bare-metal stent implantation? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Lucas Lodi-Junqueira; Marcos Roberto de Sousa; Leonardo Carvalho da Paixão; Silvana Márcia Bruschi Kelles; Carlos Faria Santos Amaral; Antonio L Ribeiro
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2012-09-21

5.  StentBoost Visualization for the Evaluation of Coronary Stent Expansion During Percutaneous Coronary Interventions.

Authors:  Fernando Cura; Mariano Albertal; Alfonsina Candiello; Gerardo Nau; Victor Bonvini; Hernan Tricherri; Lucio T Padilla; Jorge A Belardi
Journal:  Cardiol Ther       Date:  2013-12-06

6.  Low- to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio followed by coronary computed tomography angiography improves coronary plaque classification accuracy.

Authors:  Xiyang Hu; Wei Zhang; Nairui Zhao; Rongcheng Zhao; Shuofeng Li
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-12-21
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.