Skip Navigation

Europace 2009 11(Supplement 5):v93-v97; doi:10.1093/europace/eup274
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Boriani, G.
Right arrow Articles by Branzi, A.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Boriani, G.
Right arrow Articles by Branzi, A.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2009. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

This article appears in the following Europace issue: Spotlight Issue: Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy [View the issue table of contents]

Is cardiac resynchronization therapy cost-effective?

Giuseppe Boriani*, Mauro Biffi, Cristian Martignani, Cinzia Valzania, Igor Diemberger, Matteo Bertini, Giulia Domenichini, Matteo Ziacchi and Angelo Branzi

Institute of Cardiology, University of Bologna and Azienda Ospedaliera S. Orsola-Malpighi, Via Massarenti 9, 40138 Bologna, Italy

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a treatment of proven efficacy for selected patients with heart failure and associated conduction disturbances. The increasing financial burden that healthcare systems face has increased the interest in cost-effectiveness and cost-utility estimates, focused on devices with defibrillation capabilities (CRT-D), with a high upfront cost, as well as on simpler devices providing only biventricular pacing (CRT-P). Available economic estimates are largely dependent on data source, assumptions, modelling technique, time horizon, and perspective, leading to some variability in cost-effectiveness and cost-utility estimates. As a whole, cost-effectiveness and cost-utility estimates of both CRT-P and CRT-D improve as the time horizon examined is lengthened and appear to be below US$50 000 per quality-adjusted life-year, a threshold value commonly adopted for coverage of healthcare interventions in the USA and quite comparable with similar thresholds used within Europe. Limited data are available on the comparative cost-effectiveness or cost-utility of CRT-P and CRT-D devices. Moreover, more data on the effectiveness and long-term benefits of CRT-D and CRT-P are needed in order to estimate better the value of these treatments in the ‘real world, as well as for attempts to improve cost-effectiveness through improved patient selection.

Key Words: Cardiac resynchronization therapy, Cost, Cost-effectiveness, Cost-utility, Heart failure, Health economics


* Corresponding author. Tel: +39 051 349858, Fax: +39 051 344859, Email: giuseppe.boriani{at}unibo.it


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.