4.8 Article

Cost-Effectiveness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Drug Eluting Stents Versus Bypass Surgery for Patients With Diabetes Mellitus and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease Results From the FREEDOM Trial

期刊

CIRCULATION
卷 127, 期 7, 页码 820-831

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.112.147488

关键词

coronary artery bypass grafting; cost-benefit analysis; diabetes mellitus; drug-eluting stents; percutaneous coronary intervention

资金

  1. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) [01HL071988, 01HL092989]
  2. Eli Lilly
  3. Abbott Vascular
  4. Astra Zeneca
  5. Boston Scientific
  6. Daiichi Sankyo
  7. Edwards Lifesciences
  8. Medtronic
  9. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  10. Cordis
  11. Sanofi-Aventis
  12. Biomet
  13. Jannsen Pharmaceuticals

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background-Studies from the balloon angioplasty and bare metal stent eras have demonstrated that coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is cost-effective compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients undergoing multivessel coronary revascularization-particularly among patients with complex coronary artery disease or diabetes mellitus. Whether these results apply in the drug-eluting stent (DES) era is unknown. Methods and Results-Between 2005 and 2010, 1900 patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease were randomized to PCI with DES (DES-PCI; n=953) or CABG (n=947). Costs were assessed from the perspective of the U. S. health care system. Health state utilities were assessed using the EuroQOL 5 dimension 3 level questionnaire. A patient-level microsimulation model based on U. S. life-tables and in-trial results was used to estimate lifetime cost-effectiveness. Although initial procedural costs were lower for CABG, total costs for the index hospitalization were $8622 higher per patient. Over the next 5 years, follow-up costs were higher with PCI, owing to more frequent repeat revascularization and higher outpatient medication costs. Nonetheless, cumulative 5-year costs remained $3641 higher per patient with CABG. Although there were only modest gains in survival with CABG during the trial period, when the in-trial results were extended to a lifetime horizon, CABG was projected to be economically attractive relative to DES-PCI, with substantial gains in both life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios <$10 000 per life-year or quality-adjusted life-year gained across a broad range of assumptions regarding the effect of CABG on post-trial survival and costs. Conclusions-Despite higher initial costs, CABG is a highly cost-effective revascularization strategy compared with DES-PCI for patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据