Published online before print September 11, 2006, doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.570838
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(Circulation. 2006;114:1251-1257.)
© 2006 American Heart Association, Inc.
Health Services and Outcomes Research |
Cost-Effectiveness of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafts Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Revascularization of High-Risk Patients
From the Cooperative Studies Program Coordinating Center (K.T.S.), Hines VA Hospital, Hines, Ill; Midwest Center for Health Services and Policy Research (K.T.S., D.M.H.), Hines VA Hospital, Hines, Ill; Feinberg School of Medicine (K.T.S., L.C., C.L.), Chicago, Ill; VA Information Resource Center (K.T.S., D.M.H.), Hines, Ill; Tucson VA Medical Center (D.A.M.), Tucson, Ariz; University of Arizona (D.A.M.), Tucson, Ariz; Stanford University School of Medicine (M.A.H., P.G.B.), Stanford, Calif; VA Health Economics Resource Center (P.G.B.), Menlo Park, Calif; VA Cooperative Studies Program Coordinating Center (P.G.B.), Palo Alto, Calif; Loyola University Chicago (D.M.H.), Maywood, Ill; and University of Colorado Health Outcomes Program (W.G.H.), Aurora, Col.
Correspondence to Kevin T. Stroupe, PhD, Edward Hines, Jr, VA Hospital, PO Box 5000 (151H), Hines, IL 60141. E-mail Kevin.Stroupe{at}va.gov
Received June 22, 2005; revision received June 23, 2006; accepted June 27, 2006.
Background— A Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study randomized high-risk patients with medically refractory myocardial ischemia, a group largely excluded from previous trials, to urgent revascularization with either percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The present study examined the cost-effectiveness of PCI versus CABG for these high-risk patients.
Methods and Results— Of 454 patients at 16 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers, 445 were available for the economic analysis (218 PCI and 227 CABG patients). Total costs were assessed at 3 and 5 years from the third-party payer’s perspective, and effectiveness was measured by survival. After 3 years, average total costs were $63 896 for PCI versus $84 364 for CABG patients, a difference of $20 468 (95% confidence interval [CI] $13 918 to $27 569). CIs were estimated by bootstrapping. Survival at 3 years was 0.82 for PCI versus 0.79 for CABG patients (P=0.34). Precision of the cost-effectiveness estimates were assessed by bootstrapping. PCI was less costly and more effective at 3 years in 92.6% of the bootstrap replications. After 5 years, average total costs were $81 790 for PCI versus $100 522 for CABG patients, a difference of $18 732 (95% CI $9873 to $27 831), whereas survival at 5 years was 0.75 for PCI patients versus 0.70 for CABG patients (P=0.21). At 5 years, PCI remained less costly and more effective in 89.4% of the bootstrap replications.
Conclusions— PCI was less costly and at least as effective for the urgent revascularization of medically refractory, high-risk patients over 5 years.
CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE
Related Article:
-
Issue Highlights
Circulation 2006 114: 1225.[Extract] [Full Text]
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  A. D. Frutkin, J. B. Lindsey, S. K. Mehta, J. A. House, J. A. Spertus, D. J. Cohen, J. S. Rumsfeld, S. P. Marso, and on behalf of the NCDR (National Cardiovascular Dat Drug-Eluting Stents and the Use of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Among Patients With Class I Indications for Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Undergoing Index Revascularization: Analysis From the NCDR (National Cardiovascular Data Registry) J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv., July 1, 2009; 2(7): 614 - 621. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Swaminathan, B. G. Phillips-Bute, U. D. Patel, A. D. Shaw, M. Stafford-Smith, P. S. Douglas, L. E. Archer, P. K. Smith, and J. P. Mathew Increasing Healthcare Resource Utilization After Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery in the United States Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes, July 1, 2009; 2(4): 305 - 312. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. Loponen, K. Korpilahti, M. Luther, H. Huhtala, and M. R. Tarkka Repeat intervention after invasive treatment of coronary arteries Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., January 1, 2009; 35(1): 43 - 47. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. P. Brown, A. D. Kugelmass, D. J. Cohen, M. R. Reynolds, S. D. Culler, A. D. Dee, and A. W. Simon The Frequency and Cost of Complications Associated With Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Surgery: Results from the United States Medicare Program Ann. Thorac. Surg., June 1, 2008; 85(6): 1980 - 1986. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. M. Bravata, A. L. Gienger, K. M. McDonald, V. Sundaram, M. V. Perez, R. Varghese, J. R. Kapoor, R. Ardehali, D. K. Owens, and M. A. Hlatky Systematic Review: The Comparative Effectiveness of Percutaneous Coronary Interventions and Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Ann Intern Med, November 20, 2007; 147(10): 703 - 716. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T. L. Bair, J. B. Muhlestein, H. T. May, K. G. Meredith, B. D. Horne, R. R. Pearson, Q. Li, K. R. Jensen, J. L. Anderson, and D. L. Lappe Surgical Revascularization Is Associated With Improved Long-Term Outcomes Compared With Percutaneous Stenting in Most Subgroups of Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Results From the Intermountain Heart Registry Circulation, September 11, 2007; 116(11_suppl): I-226 - I-231. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. L. Frye Update in Cardiology Ann Intern Med, August 7, 2007; 147(3): 180 - 186. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. M. Howard-Alpe, J. de Bono, L. Hudsmith, W. P. Orr, P. Foex, and J. W. Sear Coronary artery stents and non-cardiac surgery Br. J. Anaesth., May 1, 2007; 98(5): 560 - 574. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. J. Radford Percutaneous Coronary Intervention "Dominates" Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery for High-Risk Patients: Good News for Patients, a Challenge for Healthcare Planners Circulation, September 19, 2006; 114(12): 1229 - 1231. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|