Alessandro Alberti1, Pietro Giudice2, Alessandra Gelera3, Luca Stefanini3, Virginia Priest4, Michael Simmonds5, Christa Lee6, Matthew Wasserman7. 1. Istituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio, Milan, Italy. 2. San Giovanni Di Dio e Ruggi D'Aragona University Hospital, Salerno, Italy. 3. Boston Scientific, Milan, Italy. 4. Boston Scientific, Singapore, Singapore. 5. Boston Scientific, Sydney, Australasia. 6. Double Helix Consulting, London, UK. 7. Double Helix Consulting, London, UK. Matthew.wasserman@dhelix.com.
Abstract
AIMS: To examine the cost-effectiveness of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) use during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) in treating coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS AND RESULTS: A Markov model was constructed with a lifetime horizon to compare costs and health outcomes between IVUS-guided PCI and PCI guided solely by angiography from an Italian healthcare payer perspective. The population examined included CAD patients undergoing PCI with DES. From a healthcare payer perspective, the resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year was negative in the base-case scenario (i.e., IVUS benefit assumed to persist beyond the first year). When IVUS benefit was assumed to be limited to the first year, the ICER increased to €9,624. This conclusion remained consistent even when scenarios varied regarding the duration of the device's effect. Furthermore, benefits of using IVUS were greater for patients with acute coronary syndrome, renal insufficiency, and diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Using IVUS with angiography is a dominant strategy in Italy, and results demonstrate that it is desirable to target those at a greater risk of restenosis (i.e., patients with diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and acute coronary syndrome), who tend to benefit more from accurate stent implantation. Further information is necessary regarding the long-term benefits of IVUS, however sensitivity analysis presented in this research demonstrates a strong argument supporting the cost-effectiveness of IVUS.
AIMS: To examine the cost-effectiveness of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) use during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) in treating coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS AND RESULTS: A Markov model was constructed with a lifetime horizon to compare costs and health outcomes between IVUS-guided PCI and PCI guided solely by angiography from an Italian healthcare payer perspective. The population examined included CAD patients undergoing PCI with DES. From a healthcare payer perspective, the resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year was negative in the base-case scenario (i.e., IVUS benefit assumed to persist beyond the first year). When IVUS benefit was assumed to be limited to the first year, the ICER increased to €9,624. This conclusion remained consistent even when scenarios varied regarding the duration of the device's effect. Furthermore, benefits of using IVUS were greater for patients with acute coronary syndrome, renal insufficiency, and diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Using IVUS with angiography is a dominant strategy in Italy, and results demonstrate that it is desirable to target those at a greater risk of restenosis (i.e., patients with diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and acute coronary syndrome), who tend to benefit more from accurate stent implantation. Further information is necessary regarding the long-term benefits of IVUS, however sensitivity analysis presented in this research demonstrates a strong argument supporting the cost-effectiveness of IVUS.
Authors: Bimmer E Claessen; Roxana Mehran; Gary S Mintz; Giora Weisz; Martin B Leon; Ozgen Dogan; José de Ribamar Costa; Gregg W Stone; Irene Apostolidou; Andy Morales; Vasiliki Chantziara; George Syros; Elias Sanidas; Ke Xu; Jan G P Tijssen; José P S Henriques; Jan J Piek; Jeffrey W Moses; Akiko Maehara; George D Dangas Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: Andrew H Briggs; Milton C Weinstein; Elisabeth A L Fenwick; Jonathan Karnon; Mark J Sculpher; A David Paltiel Journal: Value Health Date: 2012 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai; Imad Sheiban; Enrico Romagnoli; Stefano De Servi; Corrado Tamburino; Antonio Colombo; Francesco Burzotta; Patrizia Presbitero; Leonardo Bolognese; Leonardo Paloscia; Paolo Rubino; Gennaro Sardella; Carlo Briguori; Luigi Niccoli; Gianfranco Franco; Domenico Di Girolamo; Luigi Piatti; Cesare Greco; Davide Capodanno; Giuseppe Sangiorgi Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2011-06-24 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Patrick W Serruys; Marie-Claude Morice; A Pieter Kappetein; Antonio Colombo; David R Holmes; Michael J Mack; Elisabeth Ståhle; Ted E Feldman; Marcel van den Brand; Eric J Bass; Nic Van Dyck; Katrin Leadley; Keith D Dawkins; Friedrich W Mohr Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-02-18 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Pallav Garg; Sharon-Lise T Normand; Treacy S Silbaugh; Robert E Wolf; Katya Zelevinsky; Ann Lovett; Manu R Varma; Zheng Zhou; Laura Mauri Journal: Circulation Date: 2008-11-10 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Carlo Lazzaro; Roberto Bordonaro; Francesco Cognetti; Alessandra Fabi; Sabino De Placido; Grazia Arpino; Paolo Marchetti; Andrea Botticelli; Paolo Pronzato; Elisa Martelli Journal: Clinicoecon Outcomes Res Date: 2013-04-11
Authors: Makoto Araki; Seung-Jung Park; Harold L Dauerman; Shiro Uemura; Jung-Sun Kim; Carlo Di Mario; Thomas W Johnson; Giulio Guagliumi; Adnan Kastrati; Michael Joner; Niels Ramsing Holm; Fernando Alfonso; William Wijns; Tom Adriaenssens; Holger Nef; Gilles Rioufol; Nicolas Amabile; Geraud Souteyrand; Nicolas Meneveau; Edouard Gerbaud; Maksymilian P Opolski; Nieves Gonzalo; Guillermo J Tearney; Brett Bouma; Aaron D Aguirre; Gary S Mintz; Gregg W Stone; Christos V Bourantas; Lorenz Räber; Sebastiano Gili; Kyoichi Mizuno; Shigeki Kimura; Toshiro Shinke; Myeong-Ki Hong; Yangsoo Jang; Jin Man Cho; Bryan P Yan; Italo Porto; Giampaolo Niccoli; Rocco A Montone; Vikas Thondapu; Michail I Papafaklis; Lampros K Michalis; Harmony Reynolds; Jacqueline Saw; Peter Libby; Giora Weisz; Mario Iannaccone; Tommaso Gori; Konstantinos Toutouzas; Taishi Yonetsu; Yoshiyasu Minami; Masamichi Takano; O Christopher Raffel; Osamu Kurihara; Tsunenari Soeda; Tomoyo Sugiyama; Hyung Oh Kim; Tetsumin Lee; Takumi Higuma; Akihiro Nakajima; Erika Yamamoto; Krzysztof L Bryniarski; Luca Di Vito; Rocco Vergallo; Francesco Fracassi; Michele Russo; Lena M Seegers; Iris McNulty; Sangjoon Park; Marc Feldman; Javier Escaned; Francesco Prati; Eloisa Arbustini; Fausto J Pinto; Ron Waksman; Hector M Garcia-Garcia; Akiko Maehara; Ziad Ali; Aloke V Finn; Renu Virmani; Annapoorna S Kini; Joost Daemen; Teruyoshi Kume; Kiyoshi Hibi; Atsushi Tanaka; Takashi Akasaka; Takashi Kubo; Satoshi Yasuda; Kevin Croce; Juan F Granada; Amir Lerman; Abhiram Prasad; Evelyn Regar; Yoshihiko Saito; Mullasari Ajit Sankardas; Vijayakumar Subban; Neil J Weissman; Yundai Chen; Bo Yu; Stephen J Nicholls; Peter Barlis; Nick E J West; Armin Arbab-Zadeh; Jong Chul Ye; Jouke Dijkstra; Hang Lee; Jagat Narula; Filippo Crea; Sunao Nakamura; Tsunekazu Kakuta; James Fujimoto; Valentin Fuster; Ik-Kyung Jang Journal: Nat Rev Cardiol Date: 2022-04-21 Impact factor: 49.421