Cost-utility analysis of early versus delayed endovascular intervention in critical limb-threatening ischemia patients with rest pain.

OBJECTIVE: The prevalence of chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) and poor health outcomes are high in Germany. Serious consequences of CLTI such as amputation and mortality can be effectively prevented by the early use of evidence-based therapeutic measures such as endovascular intervention. We have developed a cost-utility analysis to compare endovascular intervention with bare metal stents (BMSs) and endovascular intervention after conservative treatment from the German payer perspective. METHODS: A Markov model, with a 5-year time horizon and seven states, was developed: (1) intervention, (2) stable 1, (3) major amputation, (4) reintervention, (5) stable 2, (6) care, and (7) all-cause death. Transition probabilities were obtained by pooling the outcomes from multiple clinical studies. The costs were estimated using data from the German diagnosis-related group system, the German rehabilitation fund, and related literature. Health-state utilities were obtained from the reported data. The primary outcomes were the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs. RESULTS: Early BMS intervention after 5 years resulted in a cost of €23,913 and an increase of 2.5 QALYs per patient, and endovascular intervention with BMS after conservative treatment after 5 years resulted in a cost of €18,323 and an increase of 2 QALYs per patient. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €12,438. The number of major amputations was reduced by 6%. The results of the structural, deterministic, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were robust. CONCLUSIONS: Early endovascular intervention with BMS resulted in more QALYs and a reduced risk of major amputation for early-stage CLTI patients. Our results showed that early endovascular intervention is very cost-effective according to World Health Organization recommended cost-effectiveness thresholds. However, the clinical decision regarding the use of early endovascular intervention should be determined by individual patient-level eligibility and the physician's judgment.

Preclinical comparative assessment of a dedicated pediatric poly-L-lactic-acid-based bioresorbable scaffold with a low-profile bare metal stent.

BACKGROUND: Polymer-based bioresorbable scaffolds (PBBS) have been assessed for coronary revascularization with mixed outcomes. Few studies have targeted pediatric-specific scaffolds. We sought to assess safety, efficacy, and short-term performance of a dedicated drug-free PBBS pediatric scaffold compared to a standard low-profile bare metal stent (BMS) in central and peripheral arteries of weaned piglets. METHODS: Forty-two devices (22 Elixir poly-L-lactic-acid-based pediatric bioresorbable scaffolds [BRS] [6 × 18 mm] and 20 control BMS Cook Formula 418 [6 × 20 mm]) were implanted in the descending aorta and pulmonary arteries (PAs) of 14 female Yucatan piglets. Quantitative measurements were collected on the day of device deployment and 30 and 90 days postimplantation to compare device patency and integrity. RESULTS: The BRS has a comparable safety profile to the BMS in the acute setting. Late lumen loss (LLL) and percent diameter stenosis (%DS) were not significantly different between BRS and BMS in the PA at 30 days. LLL and %DS were greater for BRS versus BMS in the aorta at 30 days postimplantation (LLL difference: 0.96 ± 0.26; %DS difference: 16.15 ± 4.51; p < .05). At 90 days, %DS in the aortic BRS was less, and PA BRS LLL was also less than BMS. Histomorphometric data showed greater intimal proliferation and area stenosis in the BRS at all time points and in all vessels. CONCLUSIONS: A dedicated PBBS pediatric BRS has a favorable safety profile in the acute/subacute setting and demonstrates characteristics that are consistent with adult BRSs.

Comparative cost-effectiveness of surgery, angioplasty, or medical therapy in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: MASS II trial.

BACKGROUND: The costs for treating coronary artery disease (CAD) are high worldwide. We performed a prespecified analyses of cost-effectiveness of three therapeutic strategies for multivessel CAD. METHODS: From May 1995 to May 2000, a total of 611 patients were randomly assigned to coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), n = 203; percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), n = 205; or medical treatment (MT), n = 203. This cost analysis study was based on the perspective of the Public Health Care System. Initial procedural and follow-up costs for medications, cardiology examinations, and hospitalizations for complications were calculated after randomization. Life-years and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used as effectiveness measures. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were obtained by using nonparametric bootstrapping methods with 5000 resamples. RESULTS: Initial procedural costs were lower for MT. However, the subsequent 5-year cumulative costs were lower for CABG. Compared with baseline, the three treatment options produced significant improvements in QALYs. After 5 years, PCI and CABG had better QALYs results compared with MT. The ICER results favored CABG and PCI, and favored PCI over CABG in 61% of the drawings. On the other hand, sensitivity analysis showed MT as the preferred therapy compared with CABG and PCI, in the analysis considering higher costs. CONCLUSIONS: At 5-year follow-up, the three treatment options yielded improvements in quality of life, with comparable and acceptable costs. However, despite higher initial costs, the comparison of cost-effectiveness after 5 years of follow-up among the three treatments showed both interventions (CABG and PCI) to be cost-effective strategies compared with MT.Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN66068876, Registered 06/10/1994, http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN66068876.

Intravascular ultrasound assessment of minimum lumen area and intimal hyperplasia in in-stent restenosis after drug-eluting or bare-metal stent implantation. The Nordic Intravascular Ultrasound Study (NIVUS).

INTRODUCTION: Drug-eluting stents (DES) reduce the risk of restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention. The aim of the study was to evaluate, by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), the minimum lumen area site in the stented segment and the distribution of intimal hyperplasia in patients presenting with a DES or bare-metal stent (BMS) in-stent restenosis. METHODS: The "Nordic Intravascular Ultrasound Study (NIVUS)" study was conducted in Nordic and Baltic countries as a prospective multicenter registry. Two hundred nine patients (DES n=121 and BMS n=88) with in-stent restenosis were enrolled. RESULTS: At the minimum lumen area site in the stented segment, the stent area (5.8±2.2mm2 vs. 7.6±2.4mm2, p<0.001) and intimal hyperplasia area (2.6±2.0mm2 vs. 5.0±2.2mm2, p<0.001) were significantly lower in patients treated with DES compared to BMS. The percentage of stents that did not have a minimum stent area of at least 5.0mm2 (under expansion) was higher in DES (58.7% vs. 37.7%, p=0.008) compared to BMS. Intimal hyperplasia covered 55.4±33.3% of the stent length in the DES compared to 90.7±17.4% in the BMS group, p<0.001. Focal in-stent restenosis was more often seen in DES treated patients compared to BMS treated patients (DES n=84 (59.9%) vs. BMS n=15 (17.0%), p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Stent underexpansion was more often seen in DES than BMS in-stent restenosis. DES more often had focal in-stent restenosis with less intimal hyperplasia.

Cost-effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention with cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents versus bare metal stents: Results from a patient level meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Second-generation drug eluting stents (DES) may reduce costs and improve clinical outcomes compared to first-generation DES with improved cost-effectiveness when compared to bare metal stents (BMS). We aimed to conduct an economic evaluation of a cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stent (Co-Cr EES) compared with BMS in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). OBJECTIVE: To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of a cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stent (Co-Cr EES) versus BMS in PCI. METHODS: A Markov state transition model with a 2-year time horizon was applied from a US Medicare setting with patients undergoing PCI with Co-Cr EES or BMS. Baseline characteristics, treatment effects, and safety measures were taken from a patient level meta-analysis of 5 RCTs (n = 4,896). The base-case analysis evaluated stent-related outcomes; a secondary analysis considered the broader set of outcomes reported in the meta-analysis. RESULTS: The base-case and secondary analyses reported an additional 0.018 and 0.013 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost savings of $236 and $288, respectively with Co-Cr EES versus BMS. Results were robust to sensitivity analyses and were most sensitive to the price of clopidogrel. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, Co-Cr EES was associated with a greater than 99% chance of being cost saving or cost effective (at a cost per QALY threshold of $50,000) versus BMS. CONCLUSIONS: Using data from a recent patient level meta-analysis and contemporary cost data, this analysis found that PCI with Co-Cr EES is more effective and less costly than PCI with BMS. © 2016 The Authors. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Clinical, humanistic, and economic outcomes between drug-eluting stent (DES) and bare metal stent (BMS): 18-month follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is one of the most performed interventions for ischemic heart diseases. In Hong Kong, the total number of patient discharges and deaths for ischemic heart diseases in 2009 was 33,363, including 4,360 deaths. There are over 5,000 cases of PCI yearly. This study aimed to compare clinical, economic, and humanistic outcomes among patients receiving drug-eluting stent (DES) or bare metal stent (BMS) in Hong Kong. METHODS: Patients who received stent implantation between September 15, 2009 and October 11, 2010 in Prince of Wales Hospital, Hong Kong, were recruited and followed for 18 months. Occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (cardiac death, non-fatal MI, TLR and TVR) was employed as the clinical outcome measurements. Improvement in quality-of-life by stent interventions was measured as quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). EQ-5D questionnaire was adopted to assess the QALY gained. Cost-utility analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis for BMS and DES were employed as the economic outcome measurement. RESULTS: Six hundred and eighty-four patients (DES = 402; BMS = 282) were included. From 0-18 months, TLR rate (2.7% vs 3.5%, p = .549) and TVR rate (3.7% vs 6.4%, p = .111) were lower in the DES group, but without statistical significance. EQ VAS (71.06 ± 14.56 vs 71.07 ± 16.57, p = .998) and utility score (0.81 ± 0.17 vs 0.78 ± 0.16, p = .162) were comparable between DES and BMS group. Overall, the cost per QALY gained was HKD + 1,178,100 and ICER was HKD + 187,000 (1USD = 7.8 HKD). CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference in TVR, TLR rates, EQ VAS, and utility score was found between the DES and BMS group. The higher cost of index procedure for the DES group was found to be partly offset by reduced cost of follow-up, offering cost-effectiveness in ACS patients, predominantly in STEMI patients. DES was recommended for STEMI patients.

Are drug-coated balloons cost effective for femoropopliteal occlusive disease? A comparison of bare metal stents and uncoated balloons.

AIM: To perform a cost-effectiveness analysis to help hospital decision-makers with regard to the use of drug-coated balloons compared with bare metal stents and uncoated balloons for femoropopliteal occlusive disease. METHODS: Clinical outcomes were extracted from the results of meta-analyses already published, and cost units are those used in the Quebec healthcare network. The literature review was limited to the last four years to obtain the most recent data. The cost-effectiveness analysis was based on a 2-year perspective, and risk factors of reintervention were considered. RESULTS: The cost-effectiveness analysis indicated that drug-coated balloons were generally more efficient than bare metal stents, particularly for patients with higher risk of reintervention (up to CAD$1686 per patient TASC II C or D). Compared with uncoated balloons, results indicated that drug-coated balloons were more efficient if the reintervention rate associated with uncoated balloons is very high and for patients with higher risk of reintervention (up to CAD$3301 per patient). CONCLUSION: The higher a patient's risk of reintervention, the higher the savings associated with the use of a drug-coated balloon will be. For patients at lower risk, the uncoated balloon strategy is still recommended as a first choice for endovascular intervention.

Stent Thrombosis With Drug-Eluting Stents and Bioresorbable Scaffolds: Evidence From a Network Meta-Analysis of 147 Trials.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis to compare the relative safety and efficacy of contemporary DES and BVS. BACKGROUND: To improve outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary revascularization, there have been advances in the design of drug-eluting stents (DES), including the development of drug-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS). METHODS: Prospective, randomized, controlled trials comparing bare-metal stents (BMS), paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES), sirolimus-eluting stents (SES), Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stents (E-ZES), cobalt-chromium (CoCr) everolimus-eluting stents (EES), platinum-chromium (PtCr)-EES, biodegradable polymer (BP)-EES, Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents (R-ZES), BP biolimus-eluting stents (BP-BES), hybrid sirolimus-eluting stents (H [Orsiro]-SES), polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents, or BVS were searched in online databases. The primary endpoint was definite or probable stent thrombosis at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 147 trials including 126,526 patients were analyzed in this study. All contemporary DES were superior to BMS and PES in terms of definite or probable stent thrombosis at 1 year. CoCr-EES, PtCr-EES, and H-SES were associated with significantly lower risk than BVS. CoCr-EES and H-SES were superior to SES and BP-BES. The risk of myocardial infarction was significantly lower with H-SES than with BVS. There were no significant differences regarding all-cause or cardiac mortality. Contemporary devices including BVS showed comparably low risks of repeat revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary DES, including biocompatible DP-DES, BP-DES, and polymer-free DES, showed a low risk of definite or probable stent thrombosis at 1 year. BVS had an increased risk of device thrombosis compared with CoCr-EES, PtCr-EES, and H-SES. Data from extended follow-up are warranted to confirm the long-term safety of contemporary coronary devices.

Contemporary Context of Drug-Eluting Stents in Brazil: A Cost Utility Study.

BACKGROUND: Although drug-eluting stents (DES) have been widely incorporated into clinical practice in developed countries, several countries restrict their use mainly because of their high cost and unfavorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of DES in comparison with bare-metal stents (BMS) for treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD). DESIGN: Markov model. DATA SOURCES: Published literature, government database, and CAD patient cohort. TARGET POPULATION: Single-vessel CAD patients. TIME HORIZON: One year and lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Brazilian Public Health System (SUS). INTERVENTION: Six strategies composed of percutaneous intervention with a BMS or 1 of 5 DES (paclitaxel, sirolimus, everolimus, zotarolimus, and zotarolimus resolute). OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost for target vessel revascularization avoided and cost for quality-adjusted life year gained. BASE CASE ANALYSIS: In the short-term analysis, sirolimus was the most effective and least costly among DES (ICER of I$20,642 per target vessel revascularization avoided), with all others DES dominated by sirolimus. Lifetime cumulative costs ranged from I$18,765 to I$21,400. In the base case analysis, zotarolimus resolute had the most favorable ICER among the DES (ICER I$62,761), with sirolimus, paclitaxel, and zotarolimus being absolute dominated and everolimus extended dominated by zotarolimus resolute, although all the results were above the willingness-to-pay threshold of 3 times the gross domestic product per capita (I$35,307). SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: In deterministic sensitivity analysis, results were sensitive to cost of DES, number of stents used per patient, baseline probability, and duration of stent thrombosis risk. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated a probability of 81% for BMS being the strategy of choice, with 9% for everolimus and 9% zotarolimus resolute, at the willingness-to-pay threshold. CONCLUSION: DES is not a good value for money in SUS perspective, despite its benefit in reducing target vessel revascularization. Since the cost-effectiveness of DES is mainly driven by the stents' cost difference, they should cost less than twice the BMS price to become a cost-effective alternative.

Variability in utilization of drug eluting stents in United States: Insights from nationwide inpatient sample.

OBJECTIVES: We studied the trends and predictors of drug eluting stent (DES) utilization from 2006 to 2011 to further expound the inter-hospital variability in their utilization. BACKGROUND: We queried the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) between 2006 and 2011 using ICD-9-CM procedure code, 36.06 (bare metal stent) or 36.07 (drug eluting stents) for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI). Annual hospital volume was calculated using unique identification numbers and divided into quartiles for analysis. METHODS AND RESULTS: We built a hierarchical two level model adjusted for multiple confounding factors, with hospital ID incorporated as random effects in the model. About 665,804 procedures (weighted n = 3,277,884) were analyzed. Safety concerns arising in 2006 reduced utilization DES from 90% of all PCIs performed in 2006 to a nadir of 69% in 2008 followed by increase (76% of all stents in 2009) and plateau (75% in 2011). Significant between-hospital variation was noted in DES utilization irrespective of patient or hospital characteristics. Independent patient level predictors of DES were (OR, 95% CI, P-value) age (0.99, 0.98-0.99, <0.001), female(1.12, 1.09-1.15, <0.001), acute myocardial infarction(0.75, 0.71-0.79, <0.001), shock (0.53, 0.49-0.58, <0.001), Charlson Co-morbidity index (0.81,0.77-0.86, <0.001), private insurance/HMO (1.27, 1.20-1.34, <0.001), and elective admission (1.16, 1.05-1.29, <0.001). Highest quartile hospital (1.64, 1.25-2.16, <0.001) volume was associated with higher DES placement. CONCLUSION: There is significant between-hospital variation in DES utilization and a higher annual hospital volume is associated with higher utilization rate of DES. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.