Cost-Effectiveness of Fluvastatin following Successful First Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

2005 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 610-616 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E Delea ◽  
Terry A Jacobson ◽  
Patrick WJC Serruys ◽  
John S Edelsberg ◽  
Gerry Oster

BACKGROUND: In the LIPS (Lescol Intervention Prevention Study), fluvastatin 80 mg/day reduced the risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) by 22% versus placebo (p = 0.01) following successful first percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with stable or unstable angina or silent ischemia. The cost-effectiveness of such therapy is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of fluvastatin following successful first PCI from a US healthcare system perspective. METHODS: We used a Markov model to estimate expected outcomes and costs of 2 alternative treatment strategies following successful first PCI in patients with stable or unstable angina or silent ischemia: (1) diet/lifestyle counseling plus immediate fluvastatin 80 mg/day; and (2) diet/lifestyle counseling only, with initiation of fluvastatin 80 mg/day following occurrence of future nonfatal MACE. The model was estimated with data from LIPS and other published sources. Cost-effectiveness was calculated as the ratio of the difference in expected medical-care costs to the expected difference in life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) alternatively. RESULTS: Treatment with fluvastatin following successful first PCI was found to increase life expectancy by 0.78 years (QALYs 0.68). Cost-effectiveness of fluvastatin following successful first PCI is $13 505 per LY ($15 454 per QALY) saved. Ratios are lower for patients with diabetes ($9396 per LY; $10 718 per QALY) and those with multivessel disease ($9662 per LY; $11 076 per QALY). Findings were robust with respect to changes in key model parameters and assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: Fluvastatin therapy following PCI is cost-effective compared with other generally accepted medical interventions.

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chia-Te Liao ◽  
Tung-Han Hsieh ◽  
Chia-Yin Shih ◽  
Ping-Yen Liu ◽  
Jung-Der Wang

AbstractAlthough some studies have assessed the cost-effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI), there has been a lack of nationwide real-world studies estimating life expectancy (LE), loss-of-LE, life-years saved, and lifetime medical costs. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of PCI versus non-PCI therapy by integrating a survival function and mean-cost function over a lifelong horizon to obtain the estimations for AMI patients without major comorbidities. We constructed a longitudinal AMI cohort based on the claim database of Taiwan's National Health Insurance during 1999–2015. Taiwan's National Mortality Registry Database was linked to derive a survival function to estimate LE, loss-of-LE, life-years saved, and lifetime medical costs in both therapies. This study enrolled a total of 38,441 AMI patients; AMI patients receiving PCI showed a fewer loss-of-LE (3.6 versus 5.2 years), and more lifetime medical costs (US$ 49,112 versus US$ 43,532). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was US$ 3488 per life-year saved. After stratification by age, the AMI patients aged 50–59 years receiving PCI was shown to be cost-saving. From the perspective of Taiwan's National Health Insurance, PCI is cost-effective in AMI patients without major comorbidities. Notably, for patients aged 50–59 years, PCI is cost-saving.


2014 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 366-373 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehdi Javanbakht ◽  
Razieh Yazdani Bakhsh ◽  
Atefeh Mashayekhi ◽  
Hossein Ghaderi ◽  
Masoumeh Sadeghi

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate cost effectiveness of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting from Iran society perspective.Methods: A retrospective study was carried out to estimate the annual cost and health related quality of life (HRQoL) of 109 patients who underwent coronary revascularization (PCI [n = 75] and CABG [n = 34]). A Markov model has been developed to determine the cost effectiveness of CABG compared with PCI. We used the model to calculate lifetime costs, life-years (LYs), and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of each strategy. We also used probabilistic sensitivity analysis to test model robustness.Results: We found that discounted QALY lived per person in CABG versus PCI group in 5 years, 10 years, and lifetime time horizon were (3.8 ± 0.13 versus 3.88 ± 0.14), (6.4 ± 0.23 versus 6.33 ± 0.22), and (8.74 ± 0.29 versus 8.33 ± 0.27), respectively. The estimated medical cost of CABG and PCI per patient in 5 years, 10 years, and lifetime time horizon were (USD 6,819 ± 765 versus 9,011 ± 1,816), (USD 8,852 ± 1,348 versus 12,034 ± 2,375), and (USD 14,037± 4,201 versus 18,798 ± 5,821), respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio results showed CABG is a dominate alternative in 10 years and lifetime time horizon.Conclusions: This study demonstrated that despite higher initial cost and lower HRQoL, CABG is a cost-effective revascularization strategy compared with PCI for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease in long-term.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document