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

Cost-effectiveness analysis of pressure-controlled intermittent coronary sinus occlusion in elective percutaneous coronary intervention

OBJECTIVES

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) represents the standard treatment for ST-elevated myocardial infarction, nevertheless, mortality and heart failures are frequent. Pressure-controlled intermittent coronary sinus occlusion (PiCSO) might reduce infarct size showing better patients' outcomes. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of PCI+PiCSO compared to PCI from the National Healthcare Service (NHS) perspective in Italy.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to estimate life years (LYs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs. A micro-costing analysis has been performed to inform the cost of PCI+PiCSO procedure. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the model results.

RESULTS

Considering a willingness-to-pay threshold of 50,000€/QALY for the ICUR and a cost for PCI+PiCSO procedure of 14,654€, the innovative strategy may be cost-effective compared to PCI alone from the Italian NHS perspective, showing an ICUR of 17,530€/QALY (ICER 14,631€/LY) over a lifetime horizon; the probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that PCI+PiCSO is cost-effective in 78.8% of simulations.Considering the above mentioned willingness-to-pay threshold, PCI+PiCSO strategy would be cost-effective over a lifetime horizon considering a cost for PCI+PiCSO procedure lower than 28,160€.

CONCLUSION

PCI+PiCSO procedure may be considered a cost-effective technology that allows reducing cardiac events, while improving patients' life expectancy and quality of life.

Trends in the utilization and reimbursement of coronary revascularization in the United States Medicare population from 2010 to 2018

OBJECTIVE

To determine utilization and reimbursement trends of coronary revascularization procedures in the US Medicare population from 2000 to 2018.

BACKGROUND

US Medicare population is increasing, and coronary revascularization decreased in the 2000s.

METHODS

This is a population-based, cross sectional study of US Medicare beneficiaries from 2010 to 2018. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' database was queried for revascularization procedures using the coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) current procedural terminology (CPT) codes. Trends in Medicare enrollees, PCIs, CABGs, and physician reimbursements were analyzed.

RESULTS

Total utilization and reimbursement decreased for both revascularization procedures. The national CABG and PCI utilization per enrollee has decreased by 40.7% (best fit line: b coefficient, 95% CI; -0.297, -0.358 to -0.235) and 26.4% (best fit line: -0.229, -0.373 to -0.0858), respectively. For CABG, annual Medicare payout per enrollee and physician compensation per procedure has decreased by 49.3% (best fit line: -0.250, -0.315 to -0.185) and 14.5% (best fit line: -11.54, -15.62 to -7.452), respectively, and for PCI, decreased by 53.3% (best fit line: -0.373, -0.560 to -0.186) and 36.6% (best fit line: -34.15, -49.35 to -18.95), respectively. Amongst the states, there was significant variability in procedure utilization, and CABG reimbursement rates but minimal variability in PCI reimbursement rates.

CONCLUSION

Even though the US population has aged, revascularization utilization and reimbursement continue to decline. Advancement in medical intervention strategies, particularly non-surgical management, may account for these trends. Further understanding of these trends will allow health systems to tailor resources to the aging population.

Cost-Effectiveness of Drug-Eluting Stents in Elderly Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: The SENIOR Trial

BACKGROUND

Elderly patients receive bare metal stents instead of drug-eluting stents (DES) to shorten the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). The SENIOR trial compared outcomes between these 2 types of stents combined with a short duration of DAPT. A significant decrease in the number of patients with at least 1 major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) was noted in the DES group.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this article was to perform an economic evaluation of the SENIOR trial.

METHODS

This evaluation was performed separately in 5 participating countries using pooled patient-level data from all study patients and country-specific unit costs and utility values. Costs, MACCEs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated in both arms at 1 year, and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was estimated. Uncertainty was explored by probabilistic bootstrapping.

RESULTS

A total of 1200 patients underwent randomization. The average total cost per patient was higher in the DES group. The number of MACCEs and average QALYs were not statistically different between the 2 groups. The 1-year incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for each country of reference ranged from €13 752 to €20 511/MACCE avoided and from €42 835 to €68 231/QALY gained. The scatter plots found a wide dispersion, reflecting a large uncertainty surrounding the results. But in each country studied, 90% of the bootstrap replications indicated a higher cost for greater effectiveness for the DES group. Assuming a willingness to pay of €50 000/QALY, there was between a 40% and 50% chance that the use of DES was cost-effective in 4 countries.

CONCLUSION

The use of DES instead of bare metal stents combined with a short duration of DAPT in elderly patients induced higher cost for greater effectiveness in each of the 5 countries studied.

Cost-effectiveness of everolimus-eluting versus bare-metal stents in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: An analysis from the EXAMINATION randomized controlled trial

Background

Use of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) has proven to be clinically effective and safe in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction but it remains unclear whether it is cost-effective compared to bare-metal stents (BMS) in the long-term. We sought to assess the cost-effectiveness of EES versus BMS based on the 5-year results of the EXAMINATION trial, from a Spanish health service perspective.

Methods

Decision analysis of the use of EES versus BMS was based on the patient-level clinical outcome data of the EXAMINATION trial. The analysis adopted a lifelong time horizon, assuming that long-term survival was independent of the initial treatment strategy after the end of follow-up. Life-expectancy, health-state utility scores and unit costs were extracted from published literature and publicly available sources. Non-parametric bootstrapping was combined with probabilistic sensitivity analysis to co-assess the impact of patient-level variation and parameter uncertainty. The main outcomes were total costs and quality-adjusted life-years. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life-years gained. Costs and effects were discounted at 3%.

Results

The model predicted an average survival time in patients receiving EES and BMS of 10.52 and 10.38 undiscounted years, respectively. Over the life-long time horizon, the EES strategy was €430 more costly than BMS (€8,305 vs. €7,874), but went along with incremental gains of 0.10 quality-adjusted life-years. This resulted in an average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio over all simulations of €3,948 per quality-adjusted life-years gained and was below a willingness-to-pay threshold of €25,000 per quality-adjusted life-years gained in 86.9% of simulation runs.

Conclusions

Despite higher total costs relative to BMS, EES appeared to be a cost-effective therapy for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients due to their incremental effectiveness. Predicted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were below generally acceptable threshold values.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of biodegradable polymer versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents incorporating real-world evidence

AIM

Compared with second-generation durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES), the cost-effectiveness of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) remains unclear in the real-world setting. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of BP-DES in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

We developed a decision-analytic model to compare the cost-effectiveness of BP-DES to DP-DES over 1 year and 5 years from healthcare payer perspective. Relative treatment effects during the first year post-PCI were obtained from a real-world population analysis while clinical event risks in the subsequent 4 years were derived from a meta-analysis of published studies.

RESULTS

At 1 year, based on the clinical data analysis of 497 propensity-score matched pairs of patients, BP-DES were associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of USD20 503 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. At 5 years, BP-DES yielded an ICER of USD4062 per QALY gained. At the willingness-to-pay threshold of USD50 400 (one gross domestic product per capita in Singapore in 2015), BP-DES were cost-effective. Sensitivity analysis showed that the cost of stents had a significant impact on the cost-effectiveness of BP-DES. Threshold analysis demonstrated that if the cost difference between BP-DES and DP-DES exceeded USD493, BP-DES would not be cost-effective in patients with 1 year of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents were cost-effective compared with DP-DES in patients with coronary artery disease at 1 year and 5 years after PCI. It is worth noting that the cost of stents had a significant impact on the findings.

Determinants of high device cost in current percutaneous coronary interventions

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), especially medical devices, consume large amounts of medical resources. It is important to know which type of lesions requires high device costs among current PCI. The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between lesion characteristics and medical device costs in current PCI.

METHODS

We identified 593 coronary artery lesions in our PCI database between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2015. The total PCI cost was calculated for each lesion. The highest quartile (Q1) of total PCI costs was defined as the highest cost group, whereas the other quartiles (Q2, Q3, Q4) were defined as the low-intermediate cost group.

RESULTS

The mean PCI cost in the highest cost and low-intermediate cost groups was ¥1,032,943 ± 211,912 and ¥532,547 ± 112,127, respectively. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, lesion length (10 mm increase: OR 2.93, 95% CI 2.25-3.82, P < 0.001), left main lesion (OR 2.96, 95% CI 1.02-8.60, P = 0.046), moderate to severe calcification (OR 16.43, 95% CI 7.97-33.88, P < 0.001), chronic total occlusion (CTO) (OR 5.83, 95% CI 2.07-16.39, P = 0.001), and bifurcation (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.08-3.75, P = 0.027) were significantly associated with the highest cost group.

CONCLUSIONS

Lesion characteristics including CTO, diffuse long lesion, calcification, and bifurcation were significantly associated with the highest device cost. Non-CTO complex lesions including bifurcation and calcification as well as CTO lesions require higher PCI device costs than non-complex lesions.

Comparison of Efficacy and Safety between First and Second Generation Drug-eluting Stents in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease: A Single-center Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Lots of trials demonstrate that second-generation drug-eluting stents (G2-DES), with their improved properties, offer significantly superior efficacy and safety profiles compared to first generation DES (G1-DES) for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) receiving percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study aimed to verify the advantage of G2-DES over G1-DES in Chinese patients with stable CAD (SCAD).

METHODS

For this retrospective observational analysis, 2709 SCAD patients with either G1-DES (n = 863) or G2-DES (n = 1846) were enrolled consecutively throughout 2013. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to control differing baseline factors. Two-year outcomes, including major adverse coronary events as well as individual events, including target vessel-related myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization, and cardiogenic death were evaluated.

RESULTS

The incidence of revascularization between G1- and G2-DES showed a trend of significant difference with a threshold P - value (8.6% vs. 6.7%, χ2 = 2.995, P = 0.084). G2-DES significantly improved TLR-free survival compared to G1-DES (96.6% vs. 97.9%, P = 0.049) and revascularization-free survival curve showed a trend of improvement of G2-DES (92.0% vs. 93.8%, P = 0.082). These differences diminished after PSM. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression analysis showed a trend for G1-associated increase in revascularization (hazard ratio: 1.28, 95% confidence interval: 0.95-1.72, P = 0.099) while no significance was found after PSM. Other endpoints showed no significant differences after multivariate adjustment regardless of PSM.

CONCLUSIONS

G1-DES showed the same safety as G2-DES in this large Chinese cohort of real-world patients. However, G2-DES improved TLR-free survival of SCAD patients 2 years after PCI. The advantage was influenced by baseline clinical factors. G1-DES was associated with a trend of increase in revascularization risk and was not an independent predictor of worse medium-term prognosis compared with G2-DES.

Dollars and stents: A brave new world

Reimbursement in the healthcare system is shifting from pure volume to a mixed volume/value-based metric. Using complex statistical modeling to adjust for unknowns, the study provides real world data that the use of Co-Cr EES is more cost effective than BMS assuming that clinicians select clopidogrel for P2Y12 inhibition. More cost-effectiveness analyses should be conducted to guide the use of ever costlier novel medical devices and drugs.