Cohen David J, Bakhai Ameet, Shi Chunxue, Githiora Louise, Lavelle Tara, Berezin Ronna H, Leon Martin B, Moses Jeffrey W, Carrozza Joseph P, Zidar James P, Kuntz Richard E
Harvard Clinical Research Institute, Boston, Mass, USA.
Circulation. 2004 Aug 3;110(5):508-14. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000136821.99814.43. Epub 2004 Jul 19.
Recently, sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs) have been shown to dramatically reduce the risk of angiographic and clinical restenosis compared with bare metal stent (BMS) implantation. However, the overall cost-effectiveness of this strategy is unknown.
Between February and August 2001, 1058 patients with complex coronary stenoses were enrolled in the SIRIUS trial and randomized to percutaneous coronary revascularization with either a SES or BMS. Clinical outcomes, resource use, and costs were assessed prospectively for all patients over a 1-year follow-up period. Initial hospital costs were increased by 2881 dollars per patient with SESs. Over the 1-year follow-up period, use of SESs led to substantial reductions in the need for repeat revascularization, including repeat percutaneous coronary intervention and bypass surgery. Although follow-up costs were reduced by 2571 dollars per patient with SESs, aggregate 1-year costs remained 309 dollars per patient higher. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for SES was 1650 dollars per repeat revascularization event avoided or 27,540 dollars per quality-adjusted year of life gained, values that compare reasonably with other accepted medical interventions. Under updated treatment assumptions regarding available stent lengths and duration of antiplatelet therapy, use of SESs was projected to reduce total 1-year costs compared with BMSs.
Although use of SESs was not cost-saving compared with BMS implantation, for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention of complex coronary stenoses, their use appears to be reasonably cost-effective within the context of the US healthcare system.
最近的研究表明,与裸金属支架(BMS)植入相比,西罗莫司洗脱支架(SES)能显著降低血管造影和临床再狭窄的风险。然而,该策略的总体成本效益尚不清楚。
2001年2月至8月期间,1058例患有复杂冠状动脉狭窄的患者被纳入西罗莫司洗脱支架治疗冠状动脉再狭窄研究(SIRIUS试验),并随机接受SES或BMS经皮冠状动脉血运重建治疗。对所有患者进行为期1年的随访,前瞻性评估临床结局、资源使用情况和成本。SES使每位患者的初始住院费用增加2881美元。在1年的随访期内,使用SES可大幅减少再次血运重建的需求,包括再次经皮冠状动脉介入治疗和搭桥手术。虽然使用SES使每位患者的随访费用减少2571美元,但1年的总费用仍比使用BMS时每位患者高出309美元。SES的增量成本效益比为避免每次再次血运重建事件1650美元,或每获得一个质量调整生命年27540美元,这些数值与其他公认的医学干预措施相当。根据关于可用支架长度和抗血小板治疗持续时间的最新治疗假设,预计使用SES与BMS相比可降低1年的总费用。
虽然与BMS植入相比,使用SES并不节省成本,但对于接受复杂冠状动脉狭窄经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的患者,在美国医疗保健系统的背景下,其使用似乎具有合理的成本效益。