Cost-effectiveness of invasive versus medical management of elderly patients with chronic symptomatic coronary artery disease. Findings of the randomized trial of invasive versus medical therapy in elderly patients with chronic angina (TIME).

AIM

To compare benefits and costs of invasive versus medical management in elderly patients with chronic angina.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In a predefined subgroup of 188 patients of the Trial of Invasive versus Medical therapy in Elderly patients with chronic angina (TIME), one-year benefits were assessed as freedom from major events and improvements in symptoms and quality of live. Costs were determined as one-year costs of resource utilisation. Invasive patients had higher 30-day, but lower months 2-12 hospital and intervention costs than medical patients, resulting in somewhat higher one-year costs for invasive management (p=0.08). However, billing data available for a subgroup of patients showed higher practitioner's charges in the medical patients (adjusted p=0.0015). Incremental costs to prevent one major event by invasive management averaged CHF 10100 (95% CI: -800 to 28300) or 6965, ranging from average CHF 5100 (euro 3515) to CHF 11600 (euro 8000) in a best, compared to a worst, case scenario.

CONCLUSIONS

Early increased costs of revascularization in invasive patients were balanced after one year by increased practitioners' charges and symptom-driven late revascularizations in medical patients. Therefore, the invasive strategy with improved clinical effectiveness at only marginally higher costs as medical management was cost-effective. Costs should not be an argument against invasive management of elderly patients with chronic angina.