Skip Navigation

European Heart Journal 2003 24(9):879; doi:10.1016/S0195-668X(02)00757-1
Copyright © 2003 by the European Society of Cardiology.
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
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 ISI Web of Science
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 Fauchier, L.
Right arrow Articles by Fauchier, J. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fauchier, L.
Right arrow Articles by Fauchier, J. P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Letter to the Editor

Cardiac resynchronization in chronic heart failure: some considerations about the cost-effectiveness

Laurent Fauchier*, Dominique Babuty, Pierre Cosnay and Jean Paul Fauchier

Service de Cardiologie B et Laboratoire d'électrophysiologie cardiaque, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Trousseau, 37044 Tours, France

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +33-2-47- 47-46-50; fax: +33-2-47-47-59-19
E-mail address: lfau{at}med.univ-tours.fr

Received 8 October 2002; accepted 9 October 2002

We read with great interest the recent editorial of Dr Santini and Dr Ricci about biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure.1 One of their comments is about the cost–benefit ratio of the cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), and suggest that balancing extra costs by saving hospital days makes the cost–benefit ratio of pacing therapy look favourable. In the recent MIRACLE study,2 it was found that CRT results in clinical improvement in patients with moderate-to-severe heart failure with intraventricular conduction delay. With a 6-month follow-up, significantly fewer patients with CRT than control patients required hospitalization, with 363 vs. 83 hospital days. The medical treatment was considered optimal and was similar in both groups. In our public institution, the cost of the device used is 6035 Euros (Medtronic Insync pace-maker, three leads including the specific left lead and the lead delivery system) and the cost of 1 day of hospitalization in a cardiology or medicine department is 486 Euros. The service life of the device may not exceed 4 years (considering the wish of a permanent stimulation on both ventricles) and, on this basis, we estimated the cost of the device at 171,997 Euros for the 6 months of the study in the 228 patients with CRT. By contrast, the benefit in terms of cost for hospitalization would only be 136,080 Euros. Moreover, the number of days of hospitalization for theimplantation of the device (at least 2 days, i.e. 456 days for the 228 patients with a benefit expected from CRT) and of clinic visits for the follow-up of the device has not been taken into account for this evaluation. The number of deaths was 12 in the CRT group and 16 in the control group, leading to a cost of life per year saved of 42,999 Euros that may be considered borderline for thecost-effectiveness.3 Although these comments are speculations on data that are not our property and have limitations since the incremental benefits of CRT are unknown after 6 months, this raises some questions about the cost-effectiveness of CRT in view of the number of patients candidates to CRT.

References

  1. Santini M, Ricci R. Biventricular pacing in patients with heart failure and intraventricular conduction delay: state of the art and perspectives. The European view. Eur Heart J. 2002;23:682–686.[Free Full Text]
  2. Abraham WT, Fisher WG, Smith AL et al. Cardiac resynchronization in chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1845–1853.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Kupersmith J, Holmes-Rovner M, Hogan A et al. Cost-effectiveness analysisin heart disease, Part I: Generalprinciples. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 1994;37(3):161–184.[CrossRef][Medline]

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



This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
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 ISI Web of Science
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 Fauchier, L.
Right arrow Articles by Fauchier, J. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fauchier, L.
Right arrow Articles by Fauchier, J. P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?