Abraham J Nunes1, Roderick G G MacArthur1, Daniel Kim2, Gurmeet Singh1, Holger Buchholz1, Patricia Chatterley3, Scott W Klarenbach4. 1. Division of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Edmonton, AB, Canada. 2. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Edmonton, AB, Canada. 3. University of Alberta Libraries, Edmonton, AB, Canada. 4. Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada. Electronic address: swk@ualberta.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is an option for the treatment of medically intractable end-stage heart failure. MCS therapy, however, is resource intensive. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this report was to systematically review the MCS cost-effectiveness literature as it pertains to the treatment of adult patients in end-stage heart failure. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search and narrative review of available cost- effectiveness and cost-utility analyses of MCS in adult patients with end-stage heart failure. RESULTS: Eleven studies analyzing the cost-effectiveness or cost-utility of MCS were identified. Seven studies focused on bridge to transplantation, three studies focused on destination therapy, and one study presented analyses of both strategies. Two articles evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the HeartMate II (Thoratec Corp., Pleasanton, CA). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios between MCS and medical management ranged between $85,025 and $200,166 for bridge to transplantation and between $87,622 and $1,257,946 for destination therapy (2012 Canadian dollars per quality-adjusted life-year). Sensitivity analyses indicated that improvements in survival and quality of life and reductions in device and initial hospital-stay costs may improve the cost-effectiveness of MCS. CONCLUSIONS: Current studies suggest that MCS is likely not cost-effective with reference to generally accepted or explicitly stated thresholds. Refined patient selection, complication rates, achieved quality of life, and device/surgical costs, however, could modify the cost-effectiveness of MCS.
BACKGROUND: Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is an option for the treatment of medically intractable end-stage heart failure. MCS therapy, however, is resource intensive. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this report was to systematically review the MCS cost-effectiveness literature as it pertains to the treatment of adult patients in end-stage heart failure. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search and narrative review of available cost- effectiveness and cost-utility analyses of MCS in adult patients with end-stage heart failure. RESULTS: Eleven studies analyzing the cost-effectiveness or cost-utility of MCS were identified. Seven studies focused on bridge to transplantation, three studies focused on destination therapy, and one study presented analyses of both strategies. Two articles evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the HeartMate II (Thoratec Corp., Pleasanton, CA). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios between MCS and medical management ranged between $85,025 and $200,166 for bridge to transplantation and between $87,622 and $1,257,946 for destination therapy (2012 Canadian dollars per quality-adjusted life-year). Sensitivity analyses indicated that improvements in survival and quality of life and reductions in device and initial hospital-stay costs may improve the cost-effectiveness of MCS. CONCLUSIONS: Current studies suggest that MCS is likely not cost-effective with reference to generally accepted or explicitly stated thresholds. Refined patient selection, complication rates, achieved quality of life, and device/surgical costs, however, could modify the cost-effectiveness of MCS.
Authors: Alexandra N Romanova; Alexander A Pugovkin; Maxim V Denisov; Ivan A Ephimov; Dmitry V Gusev; Marian Walter; Thomas Groth; Olga L Bockeria; Tatyana G Le; Anna S Satyukova; Sergey V Selishchev; Dmitry V Telyshev Journal: J Funct Biomater Date: 2022-01-12