Literature DB >> 18199496

Cost-effectiveness of early versus selectively invasive strategy in patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation.

L M Dijksman1, A Hirsch, F Windhausen, F F Asselman, J G P Tijssen, M G W Dijkgraaf, R J de Winter.   

Abstract

AIMS: The ICTUS trial compared an early invasive versus a selectively invasive strategy in high risk patients with a non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome and an elevated cardiac troponin T. Alongside the ICTUS trial a cost-effectiveness analysis from a provider perspective was performed. METHODS AND
RESULTS: A total of 1200 patients with a non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome and an elevated cardiac troponin T were randomized. An early invasive strategy was not superior to a selectively strategy. Total costs per patient were 1379 euros (95% CI 416-2356) more expensive in the early invasive group (13,364 euros) than in the selectively invasive group (11,985 euros). Costs of revascularization were the main determinant of the cost difference between the two groups. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the extra costs per prevented cardiac event was minus 89,477 euros.
CONCLUSIONS: The overall results of the ICTUS study showed that an early invasive strategy was not superior to a selectively invasive strategy for patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome and an elevated cardiac troponin T. This economic analysis of the ICTUS study showed that an early invasive strategy was slightly more expensive during the first year without gain in prevented cardiac events. In fact, we demonstrated a very moderate probability of the early invasive strategy being cost-efficient, even at a high level of willingness-to-pay.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18199496     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2007.10.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cardiol        ISSN: 0167-5273            Impact factor:   4.164


  4 in total

1.  Cardiac magnetic resonance with edema imaging identifies myocardium at risk and predicts worse outcome in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome.

Authors:  Subha V Raman; Orlando P Simonetti; Marshall W Winner; Jennifer A Dickerson; Xin He; Ernest L Mazzaferri; Giuseppe Ambrosio
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-06-01       Impact factor: 24.094

2.  Expenditures of the German statutory health insurance system for patients suffering from acute coronary syndrome and treated with percutaneous coronary intervention.

Authors:  Heiko Friedel; Anne Delges; Johannes Clouth; Dana T Trautvetter
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2009-09-23

3.  Regional to tertiary inter-hospital transfer versus in-house percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndrome.

Authors:  Delara Javat; Clare Heal; Jennifer Banks; Stefan Buchholz; Zhihua Zhang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-06-21       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Cost-effectiveness of drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Authors:  Louise Baschet; Sandrine Bourguignon; Sébastien Marque; Isabelle Durand-Zaleski; Emmanuel Teiger; Fanny Wilquin; Karine Levesque
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2016-08-25
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.