Literature DB >> 22301731

Health economic evaluation of the use of drug-eluting stents : First results from the Drug-Eluting Stent Registry (DES.de).

S N Willich1, F Müller-Riemenschneider, D McBride, S Silber, K-H Kuck, C A Nienaber, S Schneider, J Senges, B Brüggenjürgen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the economic evaluation of the German Drug-Eluting Stent (DES) registry includes the investigation of the economic impact and cost-effectiveness of DES compared to bare-metal stents (BMS) and between paclitaxel-eluting (PES) and sirolimus-eluting stents (SES). Here, methodology and initial results are presented.
METHODS: Patients were recruited in 2005 and 2006 in 87 centres across Germany. Selection of PES, SES, or BMS was made at the discretion of the cardiologists in charge. Clinical, economic, and quality of life (QoL) data were collected at baseline and up to 12 months. Group comparisons were conducted using Fisher's exact and t test.
RESULTS: Overall, 3,930 patients were enrolled: 3,471 (75% male, 65 ± 11 years) received DES and 458 (74% male, 67 ± 11 years) BMS. Among the DES patients, 1,821 received PES (75% male, 65 ± 10 years) and 1,600 SES (76% male, 65 ± 11 years). There were baseline differences in clinical and procedural characteristics but not in QoL. During the hospital stay, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events occurred in 1.6% of DES (PES 1.9%, SES 1.1%) and 2.2% of BMS patients (BMS vs. DES, PES, and SES p = 0.327, 0.706, and 0.098, respectively). Hospital treatment costs were 4,989 ± 1,284 <euro> and 3,609 ± 924 <euro>, respectively, in DES and BMS patients (p < 0.001) with no significant difference between PES and SES.
CONCLUSION: The economic evaluation of the large DES registry demonstrates increased initial hospitalisation costs associated with DES compared to BMS. Further analysis of the economic impact and cost-effectiveness of DES will provide estimates on large "real world" patient populations for decision makers and aid in reimbursement decisions of DES within the German and other health care systems.

Entities:  

Year:  2012        PMID: 22301731     DOI: 10.1007/s00059-012-3581-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Herz        ISSN: 0340-9937            Impact factor:   1.443


  24 in total

1.  Rapamycin eluting stent: the onset of a new era in interventional cardiology.

Authors:  P W Serruys; E Regar; A J Carter
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 2.  Coronary stents: current status.

Authors:  Scot Garg; Patrick W Serruys
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2010-08-31       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 3.  Cost-effectiveness analyses of drug eluting stents versus bare metal stents: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Mattias Neyt; Hans Van Brabandt; Stephan Devriese; Chris De Laet
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2009-01-09       Impact factor: 2.980

4.  Everolimus-eluting versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Gregg W Stone; Ali Rizvi; William Newman; Kourosh Mastali; John C Wang; Ronald Caputo; Julie Doostzadeh; Sherry Cao; Charles A Simonton; Krishnankutty Sudhir; Alexandra J Lansky; Donald E Cutlip; Dean J Kereiakes
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2010-05-06       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Angiographic findings of the multicenter Randomized Study With the Sirolimus-Eluting Bx Velocity Balloon-Expandable Stent (RAVEL): sirolimus-eluting stents inhibit restenosis irrespective of the vessel size.

Authors:  E Regar; P W Serruys; C Bode; C Holubarsch; J L Guermonprez; W Wijns; A Bartorelli; C Constantini; M Degertekin; K Tanabe; C Disco; E Wuelfert; M C Morice
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2002-10-08       Impact factor: 29.690

6.  Sirolimus-eluting vs uncoated stents for prevention of restenosis in small coronary arteries: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Diego Ardissino; Claudio Cavallini; Ezio Bramucci; Ciro Indolfi; Antonio Marzocchi; Antonio Manari; Giulia Angeloni; Giuseppe Carosio; Erminio Bonizzoni; Stefania Colusso; Monica Repetto; Piera Angelica Merlini
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-12-08       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Analysis of 14 trials comparing sirolimus-eluting stents with bare-metal stents.

Authors:  Adnan Kastrati; Julinda Mehilli; Jürgen Pache; Christoph Kaiser; Marco Valgimigli; Henning Kelbaek; Maurizio Menichelli; Manel Sabaté; Maarten J Suttorp; Dietrich Baumgart; Melchior Seyfarth; Matthias E Pfisterer; Albert Schömig
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-02-12       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Drug-eluting stents versus bare metal stents in percutaneous coronary interventions (a meta-analysis).

Authors:  Ciro Indolfi; Maria Pavia; Italo F Angelillo
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2005-05-15       Impact factor: 2.778

9.  Analysis of 1-year clinical outcomes in the SIRIUS trial: a randomized trial of a sirolimus-eluting stent versus a standard stent in patients at high risk for coronary restenosis.

Authors:  David R Holmes; Martin B Leon; Jeffrey W Moses; Jeffrey J Popma; Donald Cutlip; Peter J Fitzgerald; Charles Brown; Tim Fischell; Shing Chiu Wong; Mark Midei; David Snead; Richard E Kuntz
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2004-02-10       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 10.  Meta-analysis of randomized trials on drug-eluting stents vs. bare-metal stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Adnan Kastrati; Alban Dibra; Christian Spaulding; Gerrit J Laarman; Maurizio Menichelli; Marco Valgimigli; Emilio Di Lorenzo; Christoph Kaiser; Ilkka Tierala; Julinda Mehilli; Melchior Seyfarth; Olivier Varenne; Maurits T Dirksen; Gianfranco Percoco; Attilio Varricchio; Undine Pittl; Mikko Syvänne; Maarten J Suttorp; Roberto Violini; Albert Schömig
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2007-09-27       Impact factor: 29.983

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Percutaneous coronary intervention with second-generation drug-eluting stent versus bare-metal stent: Systematic review and cost-benefit analysis.

Authors:  Thomas G Poder; Jihane Erraji; Lucien P Coulibaly; Kouamé Koffi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-05-12       Impact factor: 3.240

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.