Gaceta sanitaria · 2009
[Economic evaluation and budget impact analysis of the Endeavor drug-eluting stent in Spain].
Сравнительное исследованиеАннотация на английскомСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Moreu José, Cequier Angel, Brosa Max, Rodríguez José M, Crespo Carlos, Hernández José M, Vázquez Nicolás, Fernández Felipe, Ruiz-Nodar Juan M, Brasseur Pascal
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Endeavor is a drug-eluting stent (DES) with superior results to the bare metal stent (BMS) and similar efficacy to other DES in terms of revascularization. The aim of this study was to assess the costs and benefits of Endeavor, other DES, BMS and coronary artery bypass grafts (CABG) in Spain.
METHODS: A Markov model with a 5-year time was used to reflect the management of patients with de novo coronary artery lesions in Spain. Model probabilities were derived from systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials of Endeavor. Health resources and costs were obtained from local data and were validated by experts. Effectiveness was measured as the number of revascularizations avoided, the major adverse coronary events (MACE) avoided and the quality adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained.
RESULTS: Endeavor had higher total costs than the BMS. The cost per revascularization avoided with Endeavor was 6,851 euro (at 1 year) and 10,831 euro (at 5 years). In terms of cost per MACE avoided with Endeavor, the results were 7,003 euro and 11,322 euro, respectively, and in terms of costs of QALY gained were 132,877 euro, 34,229 euro and 10,505 euro at 1, 2, and 5 years, respectively. The budget impact of the progressive introduction of Endeavor would be practically null, representing 0.4% of the total cost of percutaneous coronary interventions at 5 years.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of the Endeavor stent compared with BMS and CABG represents efficient resource use in patients with coronary artery disease, with cost-effectiveness results below the threshold of efficiency defined in Spain.
METHODS: A Markov model with a 5-year time was used to reflect the management of patients with de novo coronary artery lesions in Spain. Model probabilities were derived from systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials of Endeavor. Health resources and costs were obtained from local data and were validated by experts. Effectiveness was measured as the number of revascularizations avoided, the major adverse coronary events (MACE) avoided and the quality adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained.
RESULTS: Endeavor had higher total costs than the BMS. The cost per revascularization avoided with Endeavor was 6,851 euro (at 1 year) and 10,831 euro (at 5 years). In terms of cost per MACE avoided with Endeavor, the results were 7,003 euro and 11,322 euro, respectively, and in terms of costs of QALY gained were 132,877 euro, 34,229 euro and 10,505 euro at 1, 2, and 5 years, respectively. The budget impact of the progressive introduction of Endeavor would be practically null, representing 0.4% of the total cost of percutaneous coronary interventions at 5 years.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of the Endeavor stent compared with BMS and CABG represents efficient resource use in patients with coronary artery disease, with cost-effectiveness results below the threshold of efficiency defined in Spain.