A review of economic evaluation models for cardiac resynchronization therapy with implantable cardioverter defibrillators in patients with heart failure.

Abstract

ObjectivesCardiac resynchronization therapy with a biventricular pacemaker (CRT-P) is an effective treatment for dyssynchronous heart failure (DHF). Adding an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (CRT-D) may further reduce the risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, if the majority of patients do not require shock therapy, the cost-effectiveness ratio of CRT-D compared to CRT-P may be high. The objective of this study was to systematically review decision models evaluating the cost-effectiveness of CRT-D for patients with DHF, compare the structure and inputs of these models and identify the main factors influencing the ICERs for CRT-D.MethodsA comprehensive search strategy of Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid) and EconLit identified eight cost-effectiveness models evaluating CRT-D against optimal pharmacological therapy (OPT) and/or CRT-P.ResultsThe selected economic studies differed in terms of model structure, treatment path, time horizons, and sources of efficacy data. CRT-D was found cost-effective when compared to OPT but its cost-effectiveness became questionable when compared to CRT-P.ConclusionsCost-effectiveness of CRT-D may increase depending on improvement of all-cause mortality rates and HF mortality rates in patients who receive CRT-D, costs of the device, and battery life. In particular, future studies need to investigate longer-term mortality rates and identify CRT-P patients that will gain the most, in terms of life expectancy, from being treated with a CRT-D.