A review of the evidence on the effects and costs of implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy in different patient groups, and the modelling of cost-effectivenessan cost-utility for these groups in a UK context

Delayed Improvement of Left Ventricular Function in Newly Diagnosed Heart Failure Depends on Etiology—A PROLONG-II Substudy

In patients with newly diagnosed heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), three months of optimal therapy are recommended before considering a primary preventive implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). It is unclear which patients benefit from a prolonged waiting period under protection of the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) to avoid unnecessary ICD implantations. This study included all patients receiving a WCD for newly diagnosed HFrEF (n = 353) at our center between 2012 and 2017. Median follow-up was 2.7 years. From baseline until three months, LVEF improved in patients with all peripartum cardiomyopathy (PPCM), myocarditis, dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), or ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM). Beyond this time, LVEF improved in PPCM and DCM only (10 ± 8% and 10 ± 12%, respectively), whereas patients with ICM showed no further improvement. The patients with newly diagnosed HFrEF were compared to 29 patients with a distinct WCD indication, which is an explantation of an infected ICD. This latter group had a higher incidence of WCD shocks and poorer overall survival. All-cause mortality should be considered when deciding on WCD prescription. In patients with newly diagnosed HFrEF, the potential for delayed LVEF recovery should be considered when timing ICD implantation, especially in patients with PPCM and DCM.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy with or without defibrillation: a long-standing debate

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) was shown to improve cardiac function, reduce heart failure hospitalizations, improve quality of life and prolong survival in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction and intraventricular conduction disturbances, mainly left bundle branch block, on optimal medical therapy with ACE-inhibitors, β-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists up-titrated to maximum tolerated evidence-based doses. CRT can be achieved by means of pacemaker systems (CRT-P) or devices with defibrillation capabilities (CRT-D). CRT-Ds offer an undoubted advantage in the prevention of arrhythmic death, but such an advantage may be of lesser degree in non-ischemic heart failure aetiologies. Moreover, the higher CRT-D hardware complexity compared to CRT-P may predispose to device/lead malfunctions and the higher current drainage may cause a shorter battery duration with consequent premature replacements and the well-known incremental complications. In a period of financial constraints, also device costs should be carefully evaluated, with recent reports suggesting that CRT-Ps may be favoured over CRT-Ds in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy and no prior history of cardiac arrhythmias from a cost-effectiveness point of view. The choice between a CRT-P or a CRT-D device should be patient-tailored whenever straightforward defibrillator indications are not present. The Goldenberg score may facilitate this decision-making process in ambiguous settings. Age, comorbidities, kidney disease, atrial fibrillation, advanced functional class, inappropriate therapy risk, implantable device infections and malfunctions are factors potentially reducing the expected benefit from defibrillating capabilities. Future prospective, randomized controlled trials are warranted to directly compare the efficacy and safety of CRT-Ps and CRT-Ds.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of implantable cardiac devices in patients with systolic heart failure: a US perspective using real world data

Aims: Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has a substantial impact on costs and patients' quality-of-life. This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD), cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemakers (CRT-P), cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-D), and optimal pharmacologic therapy (OPT) in patients with HFrEF, from a US payer perspective.Materials and methods: The analyses were conducted by adapting the UK-based cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) to the US payer perspective by incorporating real world evidence (RWE) on baseline hospitalization risk and Medicare-specific costs. The CEA was based on regression equations estimated from data from 13 randomized clinical trials (n = 12,638). Risk equations were used to predict all-cause mortality, hospitalization rates, health-related quality-of-life, and device-specific treatment effects (vs. OPT). These equations included the following prognostic characteristics: age, QRS duration, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, ischemic etiology, and left bundle branch block (LBBB). Baseline hospitalization rates were calibrated based on RWE from Truven Health Analytics MarketScan data (2009-2014). A US payer perspective, lifetime time horizon, and 3% discount rates for costs and outcomes were used. Benefits were expressed as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Incremental cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted for 24 sub-groups based on LBBB status, QRS duration, and NYHA class.Results: Results of the analyses show that CRT-D was the most cost-effective treatment at a $100,000/QALY threshold in 14 of the 16 sub-groups for which it is indicated. Results were most sensitive to changes in estimates of hospitalization costs.Limitations: Study limitations include small sample sizes for NYHA I and IV sub-groups and lack of data availability for duration of treatment effect.Conclusions: CRT-D has higher greater cost-effectiveness across more sub-groups in the indicated patient populations against as compared to OPT, ICD, and CRT-P, from a US payer perspective.

Heart Failure: A Palliative Medicine Review of Disease, Therapies, and Medications With a Focus on Symptoms, Function, and Quality of Life

Despite significant advances in heart failure (HF) treatment, HF remains a progressive, extremely symptomatic, and terminal disease with a median survival of 2.1 years after diagnosis. HF often leads to a constellation of symptoms, including dyspnea, fatigue, depression, anxiety, insomnia, pain, and worsened cognitive function. Palliative care is an approach that improves the quality of life of patients and their caregivers facing the problems associated with life-threatening illness and therefore is well suited to support these patients. However, historically, palliative care has often focused on supporting patients with malignant disease, rather than a progressive chronic disease such as HF. Predicting mortality in patients with HF is challenging. The lack of obvious transition points in disease progression also raises challenges to primary care providers and specialists to know at what point to integrate palliative care during a patient's disease trajectory. Although therapies for HF often result in functional and symptomatic improvements including health-related quality of life (HRQL), some patients with HF do not demonstrate these benefits, including those patients with a preserved ejection fraction. Provision of palliative care for patients with HF requires an understanding of HF pathogenesis and common medications used for these patients, as well as an approach to balancing life-prolonging and HRQL care strategies. This review describes HF and current targeted therapies and their effects on symptoms, hospital admission rates, exercise performance, HRQL, and survival. Pharmacological interactions with and precautions related to commonly used palliative care medications are reviewed. The goal of this review is to equip palliative care clinicians with information to make evidence-based decisions while managing the balance between optimal disease management and patient quality of life.

Who Should Receive a Wearable Defibrillator Vest at Hospital Discharge?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss the role of wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) vests in preventing sudden cardiac death (SCD) in at-risk populations.

RECENT FINDINGS

The impact of randomized-controlled trials with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) therapy is well established in randomized clinical trials in ischemic cardiomyopathy. Although the benefits are not as clear in non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, meta-analyses show significant mortality benefits from immediate electrical cardioversion strategies. The role of WCDs in at-risk populations in whom ICD therapy is temporarily not indicated is not as well-established. Smaller cohort trials have shown efficacy in patients with newly-diagnosed cardiomyopathy, requiring temporary ICD explantation, and others with less common indications for WCD therapy. The Vest Prevention of Early Sudden Death Trial was a landmark randomized control study seeking to examine the benefits of WCD therapy in at-risk population, and although the primary endpoint of reducing arrhythmic death was not reached, the structure of the trial and significant differences in total mortality make a compelling case for continued use of WCD therapies in our healthcare systems.

Long-term outcomes after event-free cardioverter defibrillator implantation: comparison between patients discharged within 24 h and routinely hospitalized patients in the German DEVICE registry

Aims

To analyse the long-term safety of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) in patients discharged within 24 h or after 2- 5-day hospitalization, respectively, after complication-free implantation, in circumstances of actual care.

Methods and results

Patients in the multicentre, nationwide German DEVICE registry were contacted 12-15 months after their first ICD implantation or device replacement. Data were collected on complications, potential arrhythmic events, syncope, resuscitation, ablation procedures, cardiac events, hospitalizations, heart failure status, change of medication, and quality of life. Of 2356 patients from 43 centres, 527 patients were discharged within 24 h and 1829 were hospitalized routinely for >24 h after complication-free implantations. The disease profiles and rates of co-morbidities were similar at baseline for both cohorts. During between 384 and 543 days of follow-up, there were no significant differences between the groups in terms of complications, hospitalizations, or quality of life. One-year rates of death were 4.5% in patients discharged early compared with 7.2% in hospitalized patients (hazard ratio 0.65; 95% confidence interval 0.42-1.02; P = 0.052). Rates of major adverse cardiovascular events or defibrillator events were not higher in patients discharged after 24 h. In both groups, a high rate of patients declared that they would opt for the procedure again in the same situation.

Conclusion

Data from a large-scale registry reflecting current day-to-day practice in Germany suggest that most patients can be discharged safely within 24 h of successful ICD implantation if there are no procedure-related events. Follow-up data up to 1.5 years after implantation did not raise long-term safety concerns.

Quality of life in patients with implantable cardioverter–defibrillator: systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Background:

Implantable cardioverter–defibrillator (ICD) therapy significantly improves the survival of patients who are at high risk for sudden cardiac death. However, it is unclear whether this survival is accompanied by impairment on quality of life (QoL).

Objectives:

This systematic review sought to describe whether ICD therapy, as compared with standard treatment, can have an impact on QoL outcomes.

Methods:

Extensive literature searches were carried out in PubMed, EMBASE, LILACS and Cochrane Library. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ICD versus medical therapy that reported valid and reliable measures of QoL. Included studies were reviewed to determine baseline patient characteristics, mean duration of follow-up, questionnaires used to assess QoL and association between QoL scores and ICD shock therapy.

Results:

Seven studies, enrolling a total of 5,701 patients, were included in this review. The analyzed trials showed conflicting results about the impact of ICD on QoL outcomes. Among the secondary prevention studies, CIDS reported a clear benefit from ICD and AVID showed no difference between ICD and amiodarone groups. Of the primary prevention trials, AMIOVIRT, MADIT II, DEFINITE, and SCD-HeFT found no evidence of impaired QoL in patients with an ICD. Evidence for an association between ICD shocks and QoL was mixed and seemed to depend on the interval between shocks and QoL assessment.

Conclusion:

There was no evidence of impaired QoL in patients with an ICD. However, ICD patients must be educated of all possible risks and benefits, including transitory declines in QoL after ICD shocks.

Improving the Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Medical Devices

Medical devices (MDs) have distinctive features, such as incremental innovation, dynamic pricing, the learning curve and organisational impact, that need to be considered when they are evaluated. This paper investigates how MDs have been assessed in practice, in order to identify methodological gaps that need to be addressed to improve the decision-making process for their adoption. We used the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist supplemented by some additional categories to assess the quality of reporting and consideration of the distinctive features of MDs. Two case studies were considered: transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) representing an emerging technology and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) representing a mature technology. Economic evaluation studies published as journal articles or within Health Technology Assessment reports were identified through a systematic literature review. A total of 19 studies on TAVI and 41 studies on ICDs were analysed. Learning curve was considered in only 16% of studies on TAVI. Incremental innovation was more frequently mentioned in the studies of ICDs, but its impact was considered in only 34% of the cases. Dynamic pricing was the most recognised feature but was empirically tested in less than half of studies of TAVI and only 32% of studies on ICDs. Finally, organisational impact was considered in only one study of ICDs and in almost all studies on TAVI, but none of them estimated its impact. By their very nature, most of the distinctive features of MDs cannot be fully assessed at market entry. However, their potential impact could be modelled, based on the experience with previous MDs, in order to make a preliminary recommendation. Then, well-designed post-market studies could help in reducing uncertainties and make policymakers more confident to achieve conclusive recommendations. © 2017 The Authors. Health Economics published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cost-effectiveness of implantable cardiac devices in patients with systolic heart failure

Objective

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), cardiac resynchronisation therapy pacemakers (CRT-Ps) and combination therapy (CRT-D) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction based on a range of clinical characteristics.

Methods

Individual patient data from 13 randomised trials were used to inform a decision analytical model. A series of regression equations were used to predict baseline all-cause mortality, hospitalisation rates and health-related quality of life and device-related treatment effects. Clinical variables used in these equations were age, QRS duration, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, ischaemic aetiology and left bundle branch block (LBBB). A UK National Health Service perspective and a lifetime time horizon were used. Benefits were expressed as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Results were reported for 24 subgroups based on LBBB status, QRS duration and NYHA class.

Results

At a threshold of £30 000 per QALY gained, CRT-D was cost-effective in 10 of the 24 subgroups including all LBBB morphology patients with NYHA I/II/III. ICD is cost-effective for all non-NYHA IV patients with QRS duration <120 ms and for NYHA I/II non-LBBB morphology patients with QRS duration between 120 ms and 149 ms. CRT-P was also cost-effective in all NYHA III/IV patients with QRS duration >120 ms. Device therapy is cost-effective in most patient groups with LBBB at a threshold of £20 000 per QALY gained. Results were robust to altering key model parameters.

Conclusions

At a threshold of £30 000 per QALY gained, CRT-D is cost-effective in a far wider group than previously recommended in the UK. In some subgroups ICD and CRT-P remain the cost-effective choice.

Extrapolating Survival from Randomized Trials Using External Data: A Review of Methods

This article describes methods used to estimate parameters governing long-term survival, or times to other events, for health economic models. Specifically, the focus is on methods that combine shorter-term individual-level survival data from randomized trials with longer-term external data, thus using the longer-term data to aid extrapolation of the short-term data. This requires assumptions about how trends in survival for each treatment arm will continue after the follow-up period of the trial. Furthermore, using external data requires assumptions about how survival differs between the populations represented by the trial and external data. Study reports from a national health technology assessment program in the United Kingdom were searched, and the findings were combined with “pearl-growing” searches of the academic literature. We categorized the methods that have been used according to the assumptions they made about how the hazards of death vary between the external and internal data and through time, and we discuss the appropriateness of the assumptions in different circumstances. Modeling choices, parameter estimation, and characterization of uncertainty are discussed, and some suggestions for future research priorities in this area are given.

Economic evaluations of implantable cardioverter defibrillators: a systematic review

The aim of this paper was to review the cost-effectiveness studies of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) for primary or secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). A systematic review of the literature published in English or Spanish was performed by electronically searching MEDLINE and MEDLINE in process, EMBASE, NHS-EED, and EconLit. Some keywords were implantable cardioverter defibrillator, heart failure, heart arrest, myocardial infarction, arrhythmias, syncope, sudden death. Selection criteria were the following: (1) full economic evaluations published after 1995, model-based studies or alongside clinical trials (2) that explored the cost-effectiveness of ICD with or without associated treatment compared with placebo or best medical treatment, (3) in adult patients for primary or secondary prevention of SCD because of ventricular arrhythmias. Studies that fulfilled these criteria were reviewed and data were extracted by two reviewers. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed and a narrative synthesis was prepared. In total, 24 studies were included: seven studies on secondary prevention and 18 studies on primary prevention. Seven studies were performed in Europe. For secondary prevention, the results showed that the ICD is considered cost-effective in patients with more risk. For primary prevention, the cost-effectiveness of ICD has been widely studied, but uncertainty about its cost-effectiveness remains. The cost-effectiveness ratios vary between studies depending on the patient characteristics, methodology, perspective, and national settings. Among the European studies, the conclusions are varied, where the ICD is considered cost-effective or not dependent on the study.

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators for the treatment of arrhythmias and cardiac resynchronisation therapy for the treatment of heart failure: systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

This assessment updates and expands on two previous technology assessments that evaluated implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) for arrhythmias and cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) for heart failure (HF).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ICDs in addition to optimal pharmacological therapy (OPT) for people at increased risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) as a result of ventricular arrhythmias despite receiving OPT; to assess CRT with or without a defibrillator (CRT-D or CRT-P) in addition to OPT for people with HF as a result of left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) and cardiac dyssynchrony despite receiving OPT; and to assess CRT-D in addition to OPT for people with both conditions.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic resources including MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library were searched from inception to November 2012. Additional studies were sought from reference lists, clinical experts and manufacturers' submissions to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

REVIEW METHODS

Inclusion criteria were applied by two reviewers independently. Data extraction and quality assessment were undertaken by one reviewer and checked by a second. Data were synthesised through narrative review and meta-analyses. For the three populations above, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing (1) ICD with standard therapy, (2) CRT-P or CRT-D with each other or with OPT and (3) CRT-D with OPT, CRT-P or ICD were eligible. Outcomes included mortality, adverse events and quality of life. A previously developed Markov model was adapted to estimate the cost-effectiveness of OPT, ICDs, CRT-P and CRT-D in the three populations by simulating disease progression calculated at 4-weekly cycles over a lifetime horizon.

RESULTS

A total of 4556 references were identified, of which 26 RCTs were included in the review: 13 compared ICD with medical therapy, four compared CRT-P/CRT-D with OPT and nine compared CRT-D with ICD. ICDs reduced all-cause mortality in people at increased risk of SCD, defined in trials as those with previous ventricular arrhythmias/cardiac arrest, myocardial infarction (MI) > 3 weeks previously, non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (depending on data included) or ischaemic/non-ischaemic HF and left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 35%. There was no benefit in people scheduled for coronary artery bypass graft. A reduction in SCD but not all-cause mortality was found in people with recent MI. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) ranged from £14,231 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) to £29,756 per QALY for the scenarios modelled. CRT-P and CRT-D reduced mortality and HF hospitalisations, and improved other outcomes, in people with HF as a result of LVSD and cardiac dyssynchrony when compared with OPT. The rate of SCD was lower with CRT-D than with CRT-P but other outcomes were similar. CRT-P and CRT-D compared with OPT produced ICERs of £27,584 per QALY and £27,899 per QALY respectively. The ICER for CRT-D compared with CRT-P was £28,420 per QALY. In people with both conditions, CRT-D reduced the risk of all-cause mortality and HF hospitalisation, and improved other outcomes, compared with ICDs. Complications were more common with CRT-D. Initial management with OPT alone was most cost-effective (ICER £2824 per QALY compared with ICD) when health-related quality of life was kept constant over time. Costs and QALYs for CRT-D and CRT-P were similar. The ICER for CRT-D compared with ICD was £27,195 per QALY and that for CRT-D compared with OPT was £35,193 per QALY.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations of the model include the structural assumptions made about disease progression and treatment provision, the extrapolation of trial survival estimates over time and the assumptions made around parameter values when evidence was not available for specific patient groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In people at risk of SCD as a result of ventricular arrhythmias and in those with HF as a result of LVSD and cardiac dyssynchrony, the interventions modelled produced ICERs of < £30,000 per QALY gained. In people with both conditions, the ICER for CRT-D compared with ICD, but not CRT-D compared with OPT, was < £30,000 per QALY, and the costs and QALYs for CRT-D and CRT-P were similar. A RCT comparing CRT-D and CRT-P in people with HF as a result of LVSD and cardiac dyssynchrony is required, for both those with and those without an ICD indication. A RCT is also needed into the benefits of ICD in non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy in the absence of dyssynchrony.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO number CRD42012002062.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Safety of Outpatient Implantation of the Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillator

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Strategies are needed to reduce health care costs and improve patient care. The objective of our study was to analyze the safety of outpatient implantation of cardioverter-defibrillators.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted in 401 consecutive patients who received an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator between 2007 and 2012. The rate of intervention-related complications was compared between 232 patients (58%) whose implantation was performed in the outpatient setting and 169 patients (42%) whose intervention was performed in the inpatient setting.

RESULTS

The mean age (standard deviation) of the patients was 62 (14) years; 336 (84%) were male. Outpatients had lower left ventricular ejection fraction and a higher percentage had an indication for primary prevention of sudden death, compared to inpatients. Only 21 outpatients (9%) required subsequent hospitalization. The rate of complications until the third month postimplantation was similar for outpatients (6.0%) and inpatients (5.3%); P = .763. In multivariate analysis, only previous anticoagulant therapy was related to the presence of complications (odds ratio = 3.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-7.4; P < .01), mainly due to an increased rate of pocket hematomas. Each outpatient implantation saved approximately €735.

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient implantation of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators is safe and reduces costs. Close observation is recommended for patients receiving chronic anticoagulation therapy due to an increased risk of complications.

Cost effectiveness of a pharmacist-led information technology intervention for reducing rates of clinically important errors in medicines management in general practices (PINCER)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

We recently showed that a pharmacist-led information technology-based intervention (PINCER) was significantly more effective in reducing medication errors in general practices than providing simple feedback on errors, with cost per error avoided at £79 (US$131). We aimed to estimate cost effectiveness of the PINCER intervention by combining effectiveness in error reduction and intervention costs with the effect of the individual errors on patient outcomes and healthcare costs, to estimate the effect on costs and QALYs.

METHODS

We developed Markov models for each of six medication errors targeted by PINCER. Clinical event probability, treatment pathway, resource use and costs were extracted from literature and costing tariffs. A composite probabilistic model combined patient-level error models with practice-level error rates and intervention costs from the trial. Cost per extra QALY and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were generated from the perspective of NHS England, with a 5-year time horizon.

RESULTS

The PINCER intervention generated £2,679 less cost and 0.81 more QALYs per practice [incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER): -£3,037 per QALY] in the deterministic analysis. In the probabilistic analysis, PINCER generated 0.001 extra QALYs per practice compared with simple feedback, at £4.20 less per practice. Despite this extremely small set of differences in costs and outcomes, PINCER dominated simple feedback with a mean ICER of -£3,936 (standard error £2,970). At a ceiling 'willingness-to-pay' of £20,000/QALY, PINCER reaches 59 % probability of being cost effective.

CONCLUSIONS

PINCER produced marginal health gain at slightly reduced overall cost. Results are uncertain due to the poor quality of data to inform the effect of avoiding errors.

Estimating the payoffs from cardiovascular disease research in Canada: an economic analysis

BACKGROUND

Investments in medical research can result in health improvements, reductions in health expenditures and secondary economic benefits. These "returns" have not been quantified in Canada. Our objective was to estimate the return on cardiovascular disease research funded by public or charitable organizations.

METHODS

Our primary outcome was the internal rate of return on cardiovascular disease research funded by public or charitable sources. The internal rate of return is the annual monetary benefit to the economy for each dollar invested in cardiovascular disease research. Calculation of the internal rate of return involved the following: measuring expenditures on cardiovascular disease research, estimating the health gains accrued from new treatments for cardiovascular disease, determining the proportion of health gains attributable to cardiovascular disease research and the time lag between research expenditures and health gains, and estimating the spillovers from public- or charitable-sector investments to other sectors of the economy.

RESULTS

Expenditures by public or charitable organizations on cardiovascular disease research from 1981 to 1992 amounted to $392 million (2005 dollars). Health gains associated with new treatments from 1994 to 2005 (13-yr lag) amounted to 2.2 million quality-adjusted life-years. We calculated an internal rate of return of 20.6%.

CONCLUSION

Canadians obtain relatively high health and economic gains from investments in cardiovascular disease research. Every $1 invested in cardiovascular disease research by public or charitable sources yields a stream of benefits of roughly $0.21 to the Canadian economy per year, in perpetuity.

Tilt testing is more cost-effective than implantable loop recorder monitoring as a means of directing pacing therapy in people with recurrent episodes of suspected vasovagal syncope that affect their quality of life or present a high risk of injury

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of implantable loop recorders (ILRs) and tilt testing (TT) to direct pacing therapy in people with recurrent episodes of transient loss of consciousness that are adversely affecting their quality of life or represent a high risk of injury and are suspected to be vasovagal.

DESIGN

Decision analytical modelling was used to estimate the costs and benefits of diagnostic testing including the costs and benefits of treatment for several clinically important arrhythmias following diagnosis.

SETTING

A UK National Health Service and personal social services perspective was taken.

PATIENTS

People with recurrent episodes of transient loss of consciousness that are adversely affecting their quality of life or represent a high risk of injury and which are suspected to be vasovagal.

INTERVENTIONS

The diagnostic test strategies compared were TT alone, TT followed by ILR (if TT 'negative'), ILR alone and no further testing.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Benefits measured using quality-adjusted life years and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) are reported.

RESULTS

The ICERs for TT alone, ILR alone and TT followed by ILR were £5960, £24 620 and £19 110, respectively, compared with no testing. ILR alone was extendedly dominated by the other strategies, meaning that it is never the most cost-effective option. Sensitivity analysis found that the cost-effectiveness estimates were robust despite the areas of uncertainty identified in the evidence and assumptions used to inform the model.

CONCLUSIONS

TT alone is likely to be the most cost-effective strategy in this population.

Cost-effectiveness of implantable defibrillators after myocardial infarction based on 8-year follow-up data (MADIT II)

OBJECTIVES

About 190,000 Germans experience a myocardial infarction each year. Of these, 25% may be eligible for an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) due to low left ventricular ejection fraction. Given the high costs of implantation, the purpose of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of ICDs compared to conventional therapy in patients with an ejection fraction 30% or less after MI in Germany.

METHODS

The economic evaluation was performed from the perspective of the German statutory health insurance. To simulate costs and effectiveness over lifetime, a Markov model was constructed with seven health states. The model was based on 8-year follow-up data for ICD implantation after myocardial infarction (MADIT II), which was published recently.

RESULTS

The analysis shows that ICD implantation compared to conventional therapy in patients fulfilling MADIT-II criteria has a cost-effectiveness ratio of €44,736 per quality-adjusted life year gained. If every patient insured by the statutory health insurance and fulfilling the MADIT-II criteria would receive an ICD, the model suggests expenditures between €173 million and €1.7 billion per year.

CONCLUSIONS

ICD therapy cannot be considered clearly cost-effective when compared to many well-accepted interventions. If policy makers decide to reimburse ICDs in the MADIT-II population, they will need to either raise premiums or abandon coverage for other currently funded medical interventions.

[Cost effectiveness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for patients who are at risk for sudden death in Argentina]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of the cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) among patients who are at risk for sudden death in Argentina, from three scenarios: public health, social security and private sector.

METHODS

We developed a Markov model to evaluate the survival, quality of life and cost of the prophylactic implantation of an ICD, as compared with pharmacological therapy, among three different target populations according to clinical trials selected using a systematic review, and choosing epidemiological, effectiveness, resource use and cost parameters. A healthcare system perspective was adopted. A 3% discount rate was used.

RESULTS

The use of the ICD was more costly and more effective than control therapy. The cohort with greater benefits was represented by MADIT I study, showing an incremental cost effectiveness rate (ICER) of $8,539 (dollar 2009) for public, $9,371 for social security and $10,083 for private sector. ICERs for secondary prevention population were $21,016, $22,520 and $24,012, and for MADIT II population were $17,379, $18,574 and $19,799. The analysis was robust to different deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, except for the cost of ICD and for battery life.

CONCLUSIONS

The results varied considerably depending on the cohort and discretely according to the health system. ICD could be cost-effective in Argentina, mainly in the MADIT I patients.

Structural and parameter uncertainty in Bayesian cost-effectiveness models

Health economic decision models are subject to various forms of uncertainty, including uncertainty about the parameters of the model and about the model structure. These uncertainties can be handled within a Bayesian framework, which also allows evidence from previous studies to be combined with the data. As an example, we consider a Markov model for assessing the cost-effectiveness of implantable cardioverter defibrillators. Using Markov chain Monte Carlo posterior simulation, uncertainty about the parameters of the model is formally incorporated in the estimates of expected cost and effectiveness. We extend these methods to include uncertainty about the choice between plausible model structures. This is accounted for by averaging the posterior distributions from the competing models using weights that are derived from the pseudo-marginal-likelihood and the deviance information criterion, which are measures of expected predictive utility. We also show how these cost-effectiveness calculations can be performed efficiently in the widely used software WinBUGS.

A review of health utilities using the EQ-5D in studies of cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

The EQ-5D has been extensively used to assess patient utility in trials of new treatments within the cardiovascular field. The aims of this study were to review evidence of the validity and reliability of the EQ-5D, and to summarise utility scores based on the use of the EQ-5D in clinical trials and in studies of patients with cardiovascular disease.

METHODS

A structured literature search was conducted using keywords related to cardiovascular disease and EQ-5D. Original research studies of patients with cardiovascular disease that reported EQ-5D results and its measurement properties were included.

RESULTS

Of 147 identified papers, 66 met the selection criteria, with 10 studies reporting evidence on validity or reliability and 60 reporting EQ-5D responses (VAS or self-classification). Mean EQ-5D index-based scores ranged from 0.24 (SD 0.39) to 0.90 (SD 0.16), while VAS scores ranged from 37 (SD 21) to 89 (no SD reported). Stratification of EQ-5D index scores by disease severity revealed that scores decreased from a mean of 0.78 (SD 0.18) to 0.51 (SD 0.21) for mild to severe disease in heart failure patients and from 0.80 (SD 0.05) to 0.45 (SD 0.22) for mild to severe disease in angina patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The published evidence generally supports the validity and reliability of the EQ-5D as an outcome measure within the cardiovascular area. This review provides utility estimates across a range of cardiovascular subgroups and treatments that may be useful for future modelling of utilities and QALYs in economic evaluations within the cardiovascular area.

Cost effectiveness of a general practice chronic disease management plan for coronary heart disease in Australia

Background.The cost effectiveness of a general practice-based program for managing coronary heart disease (CHD) patients in Australia remains uncertain. We have explored this through an economic model. Methods.A secondary prevention program based on initial clinical assessment and 3 monthly review, optimising of pharmacotherapies and lifestyle modification, supported by a disease registry and financial incentives for quality of care and outcomes achieved was assessed in terms of incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER), in Australian dollars per disability adjusted life year (DALY) prevented. Results.Based on 2006 estimates, 263 487 DALYs were attributable to CHD in Australia. The proposed program would add $115 650 000 to the annual national heath expenditure. Using an estimated 15% reduction in death and disability and a 40% estimated program uptake, the program’s ICER is $8081 per DALY prevented. With more conservative estimates of effectiveness and uptake, estimates of up to $38 316 per DALY are observed in sensitivity analysis. Conclusions.Although innovation in CHD management promises improved future patient outcomes, many therapies and strategies proven to reduce morbidity and mortality are available today. A general practice-based program for the optimal application of current therapies is likely to be cost-effective and provide substantial and sustainable benefits to the Australian community. What is known about this topic?Chronic disease management programs are known to provide gains with respect to reductions in death and disability among patients with coronary heart disease. The cost effectiveness of such programs in the Australian context is not known. What does this paper add?This paper suggests that implementing a coronary heart disease program in Australia is highly cost-effective across a broad range of assumptions of uptake and effectiveness. What are the implications for practitioners? These data provide the economic rationale for the implementation of a chronic disease management program with a disease registry and regular review in Australia.

Relationship between the EQ-5D index and measures of clinical outcomes in selected studies of cardiovascular interventions

BACKGROUND

The EuroQoL 5D (EQ-5D) has been widely used in studies of cardiac disease, but its measurement properties in this group are not well established. The study aimed to quantify the relationship between measures commonly used in studies of cardiac disease and the EQ-5D index across different levels of disease severity.

METHODS

Patient-level data from 7 studies of cardiac interventions were used, which included randomised trials and observational studies. Relationships between the EQ-5D index and commonly used cardiac measures, Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) angina severity class, treadmill exercise time (ETT) and scales of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) were examined. Mixed effects linear regression was used to assess these relationships, with the EQ-5D index as the response.

RESULTS

Study sample sizes ranged from 68 to 2419. Mean baseline EQ-5D index ranged from 0.77 in patients at diagnosis (95% CI 0.75, 0.78) to 0.43 in patients with advanced disease (95% CI 0.39, 0.48) and differed significantly across studies (p < 0.001). There was evidence of a ceiling effect in patients at diagnosis. The minimum clinically important difference of a one minute increase in ETT was associated with a 0.019 (95% CI 0.014, 0.025) increase in EQ-5D index. One class increase in CCS was associated with a 0.11 (95% CI 0.09, 0.13) decrease in EQ-5D index. A 10 unit increase in SAQ scales was associated with increases between 0.04 and 0.07 in EQ-5D index (95% CIs 0.03, 0.05 and 0.05, 0.08). Tests of heterogeneity indicated the EQ-5D-covariate relationships were consistent across levels of disease severity for ETT and the treatment satisfaction scale of the SAQ, but heterogeneous for age, gender, CCS angina class and other scales of the SAQ.

CONCLUSION

The EQ-5D index varies with coronary disease severity. The relationship between the EQ-5D index and an outcome measure used in cardiac intervention studies, ETT, was consistent across disease severity levels, but the relationship between demographic variables, CCS angina class and most of the SAQ scales and the EQ-5D index was heterogeneous for patients with different levels of coronary disease. Differences in the EQ-5D index associated with clinically important differences in cardiac measures can be quantified and vary between three important examples - angina class, ETT and SAQ.

Cardiac signal extraction in patients with Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators

According to the guidelines the indication for Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) implantation is based on the ejection fraction. However, only a fraction of patients with implanted ICD shows live threatening arrhythmic events followed by adequate shocks. For this reason, further research is needed to find a more sensitive risk stratificator for patients prone to ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation. Unfortunately, standard prospective studies are time consuming. An alternative approach is to perform retrospective studies on patients with already implanted ICDs. So far, an implanted ICD is an exclusion criterion for Magnetic Field Imaging (MFI) studies. To overcome this problem several Blind Source Separation (BSS) algorithms have been tested to find out whether it is possible to separate the disturbances from the cardiac signals, in spite of the extreme difference in amplitude. Not all the methods are able to separate cardiac signal and disturbances. Temporal Decorrelation source Separation (TDSEP) is found to be superior both from a separation and performing point of view. For the first time it is possible to extract cardiac signals from measurements disturbed by an ICD, offering the possibility for a QRS-fragmentation analysis in patients with already implanted ICDs.

Microvolt T-wave alternans and the selective use of implantable cardioverter defibrillators for primary prevention: A cost-effectiveness study

Objectives:Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are an effective but expensive treatment for the prevention of sudden cardiac deaths in patients with severe left-ventricular dysfunction. Recent studies suggest that microvolt T-wave alternans (MTWA) predicts mortality and severe arrhythmic events in this population. However, the impact of MTWA on ICD cost-effectiveness is unknown.

Methods:A Markov decision-analysis model evaluated three treatment strategies for primary prevention in patients with severe left-ventricular dysfunction: (i) medical therapy for all; (ii) ICD therapy for all; and (iii) selective ICD therapy based on non-negative (positive or indeterminate) MTWA test results. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated from the perspective of a third party payer using a 10-year time horizon. Sensitivity analyses examined the robustness of the estimates.

Results:A treatment strategy involving ICD therapy in all patients was associated with an ICER of $121,800/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) compared with medical therapy, whereas a treatment strategy involving the selective use of ICDs based on MTWA test results was associated with an ICER of $108,900/QALY compared with medical therapy. Sensitivity analyses suggest that, under most scenarios, the selective use of ICDs based on MTWA results does not decrease the ICER to below $100,000/QALY.

Conclusion:MTWA only marginally improves the cost-effectiveness of ICDs for primary prevention in patients with severe left-ventricular dysfunction. There remains a need for improved means to effectively identify which patients will derive the greatest benefit from ICD implantation.