Heartbeat: risk of stroke in patients with heart failure

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.

Discharge disposition and 1-year readmission in acute-phase hospitalized patients with heart failure: a retrospective observational multi-center study

Patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (HF) tend to experience declines in physical function and activities of daily living (ADL) due to bed rest and restricted mobilization. This could result in some patients being transferred to rehabilitation hospitals. This study aims to examine the relationship between discharge disposition and 1-year readmission and mortality rates in HF patients. Nine hundred fifty six consecutive HF patients who were hospitalized for acute decompensated HF and underwent rehabilitation were divided into two groups: home (returned home) or transfer (transferred to rehabilitative or long-term care hospital units due to decline in physical function and/or ADL) groups. The primary and secondary outcomes were 1-year readmission and mortality rates after discharge, respectively. Of the 956 patients, 8.6% (n = 82) were transferred to rehabilitative or long-term care hospital units. Over a 1-year follow-up period, all-cause and HF readmission rates were 50.1% (n = 479) and 27.2% (n = 260), respectively. The transfer group had significantly lower readmission rates compared to home group after adjusting for the pre-existing risk factors (hazard ratio for all-cause and HF readmission: 0.600 and 0.552, 95% CI 0.401-0.897 and 0.314-0.969; P = 0.013 and P = 0.038, respectively). There was no significant relationship between discharge disposition and all-cause mortality rate. Low ADL defined as Barthel index < 60 points was identified as a predictor of all-cause and HF readmission among the home group (odds ratio for all-cause and HF readmission rates: 2.156 and 1.847, 95% CI 1.026-4.531 and 1.036-2.931; P = 0.043 and P = 0.037, respectively). This multi-center study demonstrated that HF patients transferred to rehabilitative or long-term care hospital units after an acute hospitalization had a significantly decreased 1-year all-cause and HF readmission rates compared to patients who returned to their home. These findings may help in selecting a discharge disposition for older HF patients with ADL decline.