scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness of Adding Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy to an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Among Patients With Mild Heart Failure

2015 ◽  
Vol 163 (6) ◽  
pp. 417 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Y. Woo ◽  
Erika J. Strandberg ◽  
Michelle D. Schmiegelow ◽  
Allison L. Pitt ◽  
Mark A. Hlatky ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abedin Teimourizad ◽  
Aziz Rezapour ◽  
Saeed Sadeghian ◽  
Masih Tajdini

Abstract Introduction Heart failure (HF) is an unusual heart function that causes reduction in cardiac or pulmonary output. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is a mechanical device that helps to recover ventricular dysfunction by pacing the ventricles. This study planned to systematically review cost-effectiveness of CRT combined with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) versus ICD in patients with HF. Methods We used five databases (NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Cochrane Library, Medline, PubMed, and Scopus) to systematically reviewed studies published in the English language on the cost-effectiveness of CRT with defibrillator (CRT-D) Vs. ICD in patients with HF over 2000 to 2020. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist was applied to assess the quality of the selected studies. Results Five studies reporting the cost-effectiveness of CRT-D vs ICD were finally identified. The results revealed that time horizon, direct medical costs, type of model, discount rate, and sensitivity analysis obviously mentioned in almost all studies. All studies used quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) as an effectiveness measurement. The highest and the lowest Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were reported in the USA ($138,649per QALY) and the UK ($41,787per QALY), respectively. Conclusion Result of the study showed that CRT-D compared to ICD alone was the most cost-effective treatment in patients with HF.


2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 204-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael R. Gold ◽  
Amie Padhiar ◽  
Stuart Mealing ◽  
Manpreet K. Sidhu ◽  
Stelios I. Tsintzos ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
MEI YANG ◽  
Xuping Li ◽  
John C. Morris III ◽  
Jinjun Liang ◽  
Abhishek J. Deshmukh ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Hypothyroidism is known to be associated with adverse clinical outcomes in heart failure. The association between hypothyroidism and cardiac resynchronization therapy outcomes in patients with severe heart failure is not clear. Methods The study included 1,316 patients who received cardiac resynchronization therapy between 2002 and 2015. Baseline demographics and cardiac resynchronization therapy outcomes, including left ventricular ejection fraction, New York Heart Association class, appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy, and all-cause mortality, were collected from the electronic health record. Results Of the study cohort, 350 patients (26.6%) were classified as the hypothyroidism group. The median duration of follow-up was 3.6 years (interquartile range, 1.7-6.2). Hypothyroidism was not associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality in patients receiving CRT for heart failure. The risk of appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy significantly increased in association with increased baseline thyroid -stimulating hormone level in the entire cohort (hazard ratio, 1.23 per 5mIU/L increase; 95% CI, 1.01-1.5; P=0.04) as well as in the hypothyroid group (hazard ratio, 1.44 per 5mIU/L increase; 95% CI, 1.13-1.84; P=0.004). Conclusions CRT improves cardiac function in hypothyroid patients. The ventricular arrhythmic events requiring ICD therapies are associated with baseline TSH level, which might be considered as an important biomarker to stratify the risk of sudden death for patients with heart failure and hypothyroidism.


Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Qi Zheng ◽  
Sarah Goodlin

Background: Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-D) reduce mortality and improve functional status in selected patients with heart failure (HF). However, there are potential procedural risks and psychosocial concerns associated with device implant. This qualitative study aims to explore patients’ and families’ understanding of ICD/CRT-D, heart failure and arrhythmia in the process of decision making regarding device implant. Methods: We conducted 14 focus groups or interviews in Salt Lake City UT and Silver Spring MD. This study included 23 patients, who had either an ICD or CRT-D implant for primary prevention, and 14 family members. Grounded theory analysis was performed to reach a conceptual understanding of patients’ and families’ perceptions and needs. Results: Patients and families largely made decision of ICD/CRT implant based on physicians’ recommendations, e.g. “I really try to do what they tell me to do” (icdpt 1). Patients perceived ICD as lifesaving and CRT being helpful to improve functional status. Many patients described ICD as lifesaving by “restarting a heart if it stops”, while did not understand HF or ventricular arrhythmia. Patients perceived an urgency to consider ICD implant from their physicians, but no such urgency was perceived when they discussed about CRT-D implant. Few participants were concerned with costs, or had knowledge of potential lead malfunction, device removal and associated risks. Many emphasized the importance of information about life expectancies, what HF is, options of different devices, complications and precautions, and what to expect regarding lifestyle changes. Conclusion: Patients and families largely relied on the information provided by physicians and followed physicians’ guidance. They had limited understanding of their prognosis, HF and arrhythmia, and they were motivated to learn. Discussion about devices should include prognosis and healthy life style changes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document