Suppr超能文献

单腔和双腔心脏起搏器。一项正式的成本比较。

Single-chamber and dual-chamber cardiac pacemakers. A formal cost comparison.

作者信息

Eagle K A, Mulley A G, Singer D E, Schoenfeld D, Harthorne J W, Thibault G E

出版信息

Ann Intern Med. 1986 Aug;105(2):264-71. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-105-2-264.

Abstract

Dual-chamber pacemakers, more sophisticated and costly than single-chamber pacemakers, are being used with increasing frequency, often with unclear indications. Proponents of dual-chamber devices have focused on initial differences in cost without considering additional induced costs. We examined the incremental cost of dual-versus single-chamber pacemakers over the expected lifetime of a pacemaker recipient. In addition to initial costs, we included the costs of pacemaker malfunction, reimplantation, generator replacement, and follow-up. Expected differences in cumulative costs per patient were calculated over a 12-year period. Dual-chamber pacing is $2500 more costly at implantation. The difference in cumulative cost increases to $5100 by year 12, reflecting shorter functional life for dual-chamber pacemaker generators and increased cost of follow-up. The incremental cost of dual-chamber pacemaking is neither short-term nor trivial. Dual-chamber pacemakers should be reserved for those who clearly benefit from its advanced technology.

摘要

双腔起搏器比单腔起搏器更复杂、成本更高,其使用频率越来越高,但其适应证往往不明确。双腔起搏器的支持者关注的是初始成本差异,而没有考虑额外的诱导成本。我们研究了在起搏器接受者的预期寿命期间,双腔起搏器与单腔起搏器相比的增量成本。除了初始成本外,我们还纳入了起搏器故障、重新植入、更换发生器以及随访的成本。计算了12年期间每位患者累积成本的预期差异。双腔起搏植入时成本高出2500美元。到第12年,累积成本差异增加到5100美元,这反映了双腔起搏器发生器的功能寿命较短以及随访成本增加。双腔起搏的增量成本既不是短期的,也不是微不足道的。双腔起搏器应仅用于那些明显受益于其先进技术的患者。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验