BACKGROUND: Outpatient positive inotropic support combined with implantation of an automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillator (AICD) may be used as a successful bridge to cardiac transplantation in patients with end-stage heart failure. A detailed comparative cost analysis of this outpatient strategy versus in-hospital care has not been previously reported. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-one United Network for Organ Sharing 1B patients awaiting cardiac transplantation received continuous outpatient inotropic therapy for a total of 3070 patient-days. Daily costs for outpatient and in-hospital treatment were calculated. Nonparametric decision analysis was used to determine the strategy with greatest cost savings (immediate hospital discharge after AICD implantation versus in-hospital care). A threshold analysis was performed to test the robustness of the decision analysis model. The outpatient strategy realized an average savings of $71,300 to $120,500 per patient. Decision analysis showed that no fixed period of in-hospital monitoring was more cost-saving than immediate hospital discharge after AICD implantation. Threshold analysis revealed that AICD costs would need to exceed $82,000 (currently $62,000) or that the difference between the outpatient and the in-hospital costs would need to be < or = $475 per day for any other intermediate strategy to be considered cost-saving. CONCLUSION: Outpatient inotropic therapy combined with AICD implantation in selected patients awaiting cardiac transplantation is an effective cost-minimizing strategy.
BACKGROUND:Outpatient positive inotropic support combined with implantation of an automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillator (AICD) may be used as a successful bridge to cardiac transplantation in patients with end-stage heart failure. A detailed comparative cost analysis of this outpatient strategy versus in-hospital care has not been previously reported. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-one United Network for Organ Sharing 1B patients awaiting cardiac transplantation received continuous outpatient inotropic therapy for a total of 3070 patient-days. Daily costs for outpatient and in-hospital treatment were calculated. Nonparametric decision analysis was used to determine the strategy with greatest cost savings (immediate hospital discharge after AICD implantation versus in-hospital care). A threshold analysis was performed to test the robustness of the decision analysis model. The outpatient strategy realized an average savings of $71,300 to $120,500 per patient. Decision analysis showed that no fixed period of in-hospital monitoring was more cost-saving than immediate hospital discharge after AICD implantation. Threshold analysis revealed that AICD costs would need to exceed $82,000 (currently $62,000) or that the difference between the outpatient and the in-hospital costs would need to be < or = $475 per day for any other intermediate strategy to be considered cost-saving. CONCLUSION:Outpatient inotropic therapy combined with AICD implantation in selected patients awaiting cardiac transplantation is an effective cost-minimizing strategy.