Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of implantable cardioverter defibrillators for arrhythmias: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Cardiac Resynchronization and Defibrillator Therapy (CRT-D) or CRT Alone (CRT-P) in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy and heart failure without late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI) high-risk markers - CRT-REALITY study - Study design and rationale

BACKGROUND

Primary preventive implantation of implantable defibrillator (ICD) is according to current guidelines indicated in patients with heart failure NYHA (New York Heart Association) class II/III and LVEF <35%. Thanks to advances in heart failure pharmacotherapy, a decrease in mortality could render a benefit of ICD insufficient to justify its implantation in some patients.

METHODS

Study design: multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial evaluating the benefit of implantation of Cardiac Resynchronization and Defibrillator Therapy (CRT-D) or CRT Alone (CRT-P) in non-ischemic patients with reduced left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) and optimal pharmacotherapy without significant mid-wall myocardial fibrosis detected by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). The primary end-point: Re-hospitalization for heart failure, ventricular tachycardia, major adverse cardiac events (MACE). The secondary end-points: Sudden cardiac death, cardiovascular death, resuscitated cardiac arrest or sustained ventricular tachycardia, device-related complications, and change in quality of life. Course of the study: After a pharmacotherapy is optimized and significant mid-wall myocardial fibrosis excluded, patients will be randomized 1:1 to CRT-P or CRT-D implantation.

DISCUSSION

If our hypothesis is confirmed, this could provide evidence for the management of these patients with a significant impact on common daily praxis and health care expenditures.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04139460.

Implantable cardiac defibrillators for people with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND

There is evidence that implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) for primary prevention in people with an ischaemic cardiomyopathy improves survival rate. The evidence supporting this intervention in people with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy is not as definitive, with the recently published DANISH trial finding no improvement in survival rate. A systematic review of all eligible studies was needed to evaluate the benefits and harms of using ICDs for primary prevention in people with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of using compared to not using ICD for primary prevention in people with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy receiving optimal medical therapy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Web of Science Core Collection on 10 October 2018. For ongoing or unpublished clinical trials, we searched the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and the ISRCTN registry. To identify economic evaluation studies, we conducted a separate search to 31 March 2015 of the NHS Economic Evaluation Database, and from March 2015 to October 2018 on MEDLINE and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials involving adults with chronic non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy due to a left ventricular systolic dysfunction with an ejection fraction of 35% or less (New York Heart Association (NYHA) type I-IV). Participants in the intervention arm should have received ICD in addition to optimal medical therapy, while those in the control arm received optimal medical therapy alone. We included studies with cardiac resynchronisation therapy when it was appropriately balanced in the experimental and control groups.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, sudden cardiac death, and adverse events associated with the intervention. The secondary outcomes were non-cardiovascular death, health-related quality of life, hospitalisation for heart failure, first ICD-related hospitalisation, and cost. We abstracted the log (hazard ratio) and its variance from trial reports for time-to-event survival data. We extracted the raw data necessary to calculate the risk ratio. We summarised data on quality of life and cost-effectiveness narratively. We assessed the certainty of evidence for all outcomes using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified six eligible randomised trials with a total of 3128 participants. The use of ICD plus optimal medical therapy versus optimal medical therapy alone decreases the risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio (HR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 0.92; participants = 3128; studies = 6; high-certainty evidence). An average of 24 patients need to be treated with ICD to prevent one additional death from any cause (number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) = 24). Individuals younger than 65 derive more benefit than individuals older than 65 (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.91; participants = 348; studies = 1) (NNTB = 10). When added to medical therapy, ICDs probably decrease cardiovascular mortality compared to not adding them (risk ratio (RR) 0.75, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.21; participants = 1781; studies = 4; moderate-certainty evidence) (possibility of both plausible benefit and no effect). Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator was also found to decrease sudden cardiac deaths (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.70; participants = 1677; studies = 3; high-certainty evidence). An average of 25 patients need to be treated with an ICD to prevent one additional sudden cardiac death (NNTB = 25). We found that ICDs probably increase adverse events (possibility of both plausible harm and benefit), but likely have little or no effect on non-cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.68; participants = 1781; studies = 4; moderate-certainty evidence) (possibility of both plausible benefit and no effect). Finally, using ICD therapy probably has little or no effect on quality of life, however shocks from the device cause a deterioration in quality of life. No study reported the outcome of first ICD-related hospitalisations.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The use of ICD in addition to medical therapy in people with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy decreases all-cause mortality and sudden cardiac deaths and probably decreases mortality from cardiovascular causes compared to medical therapy alone. Their use probably increases the risk for adverse events. However, these devices come at a high cost, and shocks from ICDs cause a deterioration in quality of life.

Role of nuclear cardiology for guiding device therapy in patients with heart failure

Heart failure is a dynamic condition with high morbidity and mortality and its prognosis should be reassessed frequently, particularly in patients for whom critical treatment decisions may depend on the results of prognostication. In patients with heart failure, nuclear cardiology techniques are useful to establish the etiology and the severity of the disease, while fewer studies have explored the potential capability of nuclear cardiology to guide cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and to select patients for implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD). Left ventricular synchrony may be assessed by radionuclide angiography or gated single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion scintigraphy. These modalities have shown promise as predictors of CRT outcome using phase analysis. Combined assessment of myocardial viability and left ventricular dyssynchrony is feasible using positron emission tomography and could improve conventional response prediction criteria for CRT. Preliminary data also exists on integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography approach for assessing myocardial viability, identifying the location of biventricular pacemaker leads, and obtaining left ventricular functional data, including contractile phase analysis. Finally, cardiac imaging with autonomic radiotracers may be useful in predicting CRT response and for identifying patients at risk for sudden cardiac death, therefore potentially offering a way to select patients for both CRT and ICD therapy. Prospective trials where imaging is combined with image-test driven therapy are needed to better define the role of nuclear cardiology for guiding device therapy in patients with heart failure.

Cost-effectiveness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in today's world

The implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is an example of an effective intervention with high up-front costs and delayed benefits. It has become a proven and well-accepted therapy not only for secondary but also for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in patients with ischemic and non-ischemic heart disease. In recent years, the international guidelines have extended the indications to the prophylactic ICD, increasing the number of eligible patients and, together, the financial challenges of a widespread implementation. In this article, we review the available economic tools that can help address the ICD cost issue. We think that the awareness of such knowledge may facilitate dialogues between physicians, administrators and policy-makers, and help foster rational decision making.

Electrocardiologic and related methods of non-invasive detection and risk stratification in myocardial ischemia: state of the art and perspectives

Background: Electrocardiographic methods still provide the bulk of cardiovascular diagnostics. Cardiac ischemia is associated with typical alterations in cardiac biosignals that have to be measured, analyzed by mathematical algorithms and allegorized for further clinical diagnostics. The fast growing fields of biomedical engineering and applied sciences are intensely focused on generating new approaches to cardiac biosignal analysis for diagnosis and risk stratification in myocardial ischemia.

Objectives: To present and review the state of the art in and new approaches to electrocardiologic methods for non-invasive detection and risk stratification in coronary artery disease (CAD) and myocardial ischemia; secondarily, to explore the future perspectives of these methods.

Methods: In follow-up to the Expert Discussion at the 2008 Workshop on "Biosignal Analysis" of the German Society of Biomedical Engineering in Potsdam, Germany, we comprehensively searched the pertinent literature and databases and compiled the results into this review. Then, we categorized the state-of-the-art methods and selected new approaches based on their applications in detection and risk stratification of myocardial ischemia. Finally, we compared the pros and cons of the methods and explored their future potentials for cardiology.

Results: Resting ECG, particularly suited for detecting ST-elevation myocardial infarctions, and exercise ECG, for the diagnosis of stable CAD, are state-of-the-art methods. New exercise-free methods for detecting stable CAD include cardiogoniometry (CGM); methods for detecting acute coronary syndrome without ST elevation are Body Surface Potential Mapping, functional imaging and CGM. Heart rate variability and blood pressure variability analyses, microvolt T-wave alternans and signal-averaged ECG mainly serve in detecting and stratifying the risk for lethal arrythmias in patients with myocardial ischemia or previous myocardial infarctions. Telemedicine and ambient-assisted living support the electrocardiological monitoring of at-risk patients.

Conclusions: There are many promising methods for the exercise-free, non-invasive detection of CAD and myocardial ischemia in the stable and acute phases. In the coming years, these new methods will help enhance state-of-the-art procedures in routine diagnostics. The future can expect that equally novel methods for risk stratification and telemedicine will transition into clinical routine.

Examination of the effect of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators on health-related quality of life: based on results from the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Trial-II

While implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) improve survival, their benefit in terms of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is negligible. To examine how shocks and congestive heart failure (CHF) mediate the effect of ICDs on HRQOL. The US patients from the MADIT-II (Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Trial-II) trial (n = 983) were randomized to receive an ICD or medical treatment only. HRQOL was assessed using the Health Utility Index 3 at baseline and 3, 12, 24, and 36 months following randomization. Logistic regressions were used to test for the effect of ICDs on the CHF indicator, and linear regressions were used to examine the effect of ICD shocks and CHF on HRQOL in living patients. We used a Monte Carlo simulation and a parametric Weibull distribution survival model to test for the effect of selective attrition. Observations were clustered by patients and robust standard errors (RSEs) were used to control for the non-independence of multiple observations provided by the same patient. Patients in the ICD arm had 41% higher odds of experiencing CHF since their last assessment compared with those in the control arm (RSE = 0.19, p = 0.01). Developing CHF reduced HRQOL at the subsequent visit by 0.07 (p < 0.01). Having ICD shocks reduced overall HRQOL by 0.04 (p = 0.04) at the subsequent assessment. The negative effect of ICD firing on HRQOL was an order of magnitude greater than the effect of CHF. A higher prevalence of CHF and shocks among patients with ICDs and their negative effect on HRQOL may partially explain the lack of HRQOL benefit of ICD therapy.

Funding health technologies in decentralized systems: A comparison between Italy and Spain

Although cost-containment policies in Europe are focusing increasingly on medical devices, the impact of these policies has yet to be fully investigated, particularly in cross-country settings. This paper analyses coverage, procurement, and reimbursement of three inpatient medical devices (coronary stent, knee endoprosthesis and implantable cardioverter defibrillator) in the Italian and Spanish healthcare systems. The research was carried out by reviewing published and grey literature, as well as national and regional legislation; in addition, 19 experts from hospitals and the industry were interviewed. In both countries, there has been a shift in political power from the national to the regional level. At the same time, the content of public coverage has become more explicit. A major issue in both systems is reimbursement, i.e. the rules about funding the delivery of services included in the benefit baskets. The differences in procurement and funding mechanisms create different incentives that may have an impact on the uptake and diffusion of technologies. These mechanisms, however, can only partially explain organizational and professional behaviour, as the use of technologies in both countries is mainly left to professionals who are exposed to a variety of incentives. There is limited direct and indirect guidance of national and regional authorities over the use of technologies in both countries. It is likely that the difficult search for a balance between introducing innovations, containing costs and assuring equity will require stronger regulatory action in the next future.

Expenditure and value for money: the challenge of implantable cardioverter defibrillators

Many technology-driven interventions entail considerable financial cost, raising affordability issues. The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is a case of an effective primary prevention intervention with high initial costs that is capable of delivering long-term population benefits. At first glance, such interventions may provoke diffidence, if not active resistance, due to the financial burdens which inevitably accompany their widespread adoption. In this article, we review the available economic tools that can help address the ICD cost issue. We think awareness of such knowledge may facilitate dialogues between physicians, administrators and policymakers, and help foster rational decision-making.

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.

Non-sustained ventricular tachycardia as a predictor of sudden cardiac death in patients with left ventricular dysfunction: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Identifying patients at risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) remains a challenge.

AIM

To evaluate the performance of non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) from 24 hour ambulatory electrocardiography as a predictor of SCD in patients with heart failure or non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Study search and selection were performed by independent reviewers using a validated strategy. Eleven prognostic studies with >100 patients with good quality data and multivariate analysis of predictors of SCD were included. Publication bias was evaluated by funnel plot with Kendall's tau b test. A summary ROC (sROC) curve was built to evaluate predictive performance of NSVT. There was threshold effect (Spearman's correlation between sensitivity and specificity=-0.818, p<0.01) which indicates that combining sensitivity and specificity was not appropriate. The area of 0.68+/-0.02 under the sROC curve indicates a statistically significant contribution of NSVT in the prediction of SCD. The true negative rate varied from 89 to 97%. Multivariate analysis and meta-regression suggested that the contribution of NSVT to risk stratification is independent of ejection fraction.

CONCLUSIONS

Absence of NSVT indicated a low probability of SCD in patients with LVSD. A risk score including NSVT should be evaluated in prospective studies.