Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://repository.monashhealth.org/monashhealthjspui/handle/1/37200
Title: The Real-World Cost-Effectiveness of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Versus Stenting in High-Risk Patients: Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of a Single-Centre Experience.
Authors: Yap C.-H.;Smith J. ;Billah B.;Yan B.P.;Brennan A.L.;Tran L.;Reid C.M.;Parkinson B.;Duffy S.J.;Rosenfeldt F.;Huq M.;Ademi Z.;Ariyaratne T.V.
Institution: (Ariyaratne, Ademi, Rosenfeldt, Duffy, Yap, Billah, Yan, Brennan, Tran, Reid) Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine (DEPM), Centre of Cardiovascular Research and Education in Therapeutics (CCRE), Monash University, 6th Floor, 99 Commercial Rd, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia (Ademi) Institute of Pharmaceutical Medicine (ECPM), University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland (Huq) Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia (Rosenfeldt) Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia (Duffy) Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia (Parkinson) Macquarie University Centre for the Health Economy, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia (Yap) Cardiothoracic Unit, Geelong Hospital, Geelong, VIC, Australia (Smith) Department of Surgery, School of Clinical Sciences, Monash Health, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia (Yan) Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong (Reid) School of Public Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia
Issue Date: 12-Sep-2018
Copyright year: 2018
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Place of publication: Switzerland
Publication information: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy. 16 (5) (pp 661-674), 2018. Date of Publication: 01 Oct 2018.
Journal: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
Abstract: Background: There are limited economic evaluations comparing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for multi-vessel coronary artery disease (MVCAD) in contemporary, routine clinical practice. Objective(s): The aim was to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing CABG and PCI in patients with MVCAD, from the perspective of the Australian public hospital payer, using observational data sources. Method(s): Clinical data from the Melbourne Interventional Group (MIG) and the Australian and New Zealand Society of Cardiac and Thoracic Surgeons (ANZSCTS) registries were analysed for 1022 CABG (treatment) and 978 PCI (comparator) procedures performed between June 2009 and December 2013. Clinical records were linked to same-hospital admissions and national death index (NDI) data. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) avoided were evaluated. The propensity score bin bootstrap (PSBB) approach was used to validate base-case results. Result(s): At mean follow-up of 2.7 years, CABG compared with PCI was associated with increased costs and greater all-cause mortality, but a significantly lower rate of MACCE. An ICER of $55,255 (Australian dollars)/MACCE avoided was observed for the overall cohort. The ICER varied across comparisons against bare metal stents (ICER $25,815/MACCE avoided), all drug-eluting stents (DES) ($56,861), second-generation DES ($42,925), and third-generation of DES ($88,535). Moderate-to-low ICERs were apparent for high-risk subgroups, including those with chronic kidney disease ($62,299), diabetes ($42,819), history of myocardial infarction ($30,431), left main coronary artery disease ($38,864), and heart failure ($36,966). Conclusion(s): At early follow-up, high-risk subgroups had lower ICERs than the overall cohort when CABG was compared with PCI. A personalised, multidisciplinary approach to treatment of patients may enhance cost containment, as well as improving clinical outcomes following revascularisation strategies.Copyright © 2018, Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature.
DOI: http://monash.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40258-018-0407-5
PubMed URL: 29998450 [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=29998450]
ISSN: 1175-5652
URI: https://repository.monashhealth.org/monashhealthjspui/handle/1/37200
Type: Article
Type of Clinical Study or Trial: Observational study (cohort, case-control, cross sectional or survey)
Appears in Collections:Articles

Show full item record

Page view(s)

42
checked on Apr 26, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in Monash Health Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.