Clinical and Economic Implications of the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-II
- Sana M. Al-Khatib, MD, MHS;
- Kevin J. Anstrom, PhD;
- Eric L. Eisenstein, DBA;
- Eric D. Peterson, MD, MPH;
- James G. Jollis, MD;
- Daniel B. Mark, MD, MPH;
- Yun Li, MS;
- Christopher M. O'Connor, MD;
- Linda K. Shaw, MS; and
- Robert M. Califf, MD
Abstract
Background: The Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial (MADIT)-II demonstrated that implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) save lives when used in patients with a history of myocardial infarction (MI) and an ejection fraction of 0.3 or less.
Objective: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of implanting ICDs in patients who met MADIT-II eligibility criteria and were enrolled in the Duke Cardiovascular Database between 1 January 1986 and 31 December 2001.
Design: Cost-effectiveness analysis.
Data Sources: Published literature, databases owned by Duke University Medical Center, and Medicare data.
Target Population: Adults with a history of MI and an ejection fraction of 0.3 or less.
Time Horizon: Lifetime.
Perspective: Societal.
Interventions: ICD therapy versus conventional medical therapy.
Outcomes Measures: Cost per life-year gained and incremental cost-effectiveness.
Results: Compared with conventional medical therapy, ICDs are projected to result in an increase of 1.80 discounted years in life expectancy and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $50 500 per life-year gained. Cost-effectiveness varied dramatically with changes in time horizon: The cost-effectiveness ratio increased to $67 800 per life-year gained, $79 900 per life-year gained, $100 000 per life-year gained, $167 900 per life-year gained, and $367 200 per life-year gained for 15-year, 12-year, 9-year, 6-year, and 3-year time horizons, respectively. Changing the frequency of follow-up visits, complication rates, and battery replacements had less of an effect on the cost-effectiveness ratios than reducing the cost of ICD placement and leads.
Limitations: The study was limited by the completeness of the data, referral bias, difference in medical therapy between the Duke cohort and the MADIT-II cohort, and not addressing potential upgrades to biventricular devices.
Conclusions: The economic expense of defibrillator implantation in all patients who meet MADIT-II eligibility criteria is substantial. However, in the range of survival benefit observed in MADIT-II, ICD therapy for these patients is economically attractive by conventional standards.
Article and Author Information
-
The results of this study were presented at the American College of Cardiology 52nd Annual Scientific Session, Chicago, Illinois, 30 March–2 April 2003.
-
Acknowledgments: The authors thank Kerry Lee, PhD, for critical review of the manuscript and Maqui Ortiz for editorial assistance and manuscript preparation.
-
Grant Support: In part by Guidant Corporation.
-
Potential Financial Conflicts of Interest: Consultancies: S.M. Al-Khatib (Guidant Corp.), D.B. Mark (Medtronic Inc.), C.M. O'Connor (Guidant Corp., Medtronic Inc.), R.M. Califf (Guidant Corp., Medtronic Inc.); Honoraria: S.M. Al-Khatib (Medtronic Inc., Guidant Corp.), D.B. Mark (Medtronic Inc.), C.M. O'Connor (Guidant Corp., Medtronic Inc.), R.M. Califf (Guidant Corp., Medtronic Inc.); Stock ownership or options (other than mutual funds): R.M. Califf (Guidant Corp., Medtronic Inc.); Grants received: S.M. Al-Khatib (Guidant Corp., Medtronic Inc.), D.B. Mark (Medtronic Inc.), R.M. Califf (Guidant Corp., Medtronic Inc.); Grants pending: D.B. Mark (Medtronic Inc.), R.M. Califf (Guidant Corp., Medtronic Inc.); Royalties: R.M. Califf (Guidant Corp., Medtronic Inc.).
-
Requests for Single Reprints: Sana M. Al-Khatib, MD, Duke Clinical Research Institute, 2400 Pratt Street, Durham, NC 27715.
-
Current Author Addresses: Drs. Al-Khatib, Anstrom, Peterson, Jollis, Mark, O'Connor, and Califf; Mr. Li; Mr. Eisenstein; and Ms. Shaw: Duke Clinical Research Institute, 2400 Pratt Street, Durham, NC 27715.
-
Author Contributions: Conception and design: S.M. Al-Khatib, K.J. Anstrom, E.L. Eisenstein, J.G. Jollis, C.M. O'Connor, R.M. Califf.
-
Analysis and interpretation of the data: S.M. Al-Khatib, K.J. Anstrom, E.L. Eisenstein, E.D. Peterson, J.G. Jollis, D.B. Mark, Y. Li, C.M. O'Connor, L.K. Shaw.
-
Drafting of the article: S.M. Al-Khatib, K.J. Anstrom, E.L. Eisenstein, D.B. Mark.
-
Critical revision of the article for important intellectual content: K.J. Anstrom, E.L. Eisenstein, E.D. Peterson, J.G. Jollis, D.B. Mark, Y. Li, C.M. O'Connor, L.K. Shaw, R.M. Califf.
-
Final approval of the article: S.M. Al-Khatib, K.J. Anstrom, E.D. Peterson, J.G. Jollis, D.B. Mark, Y. Li, C.M. O'Connor, L.K. Shaw, R.M. Califf.
-
Provision of study materials or patients: E.D. Peterson.
-
Statistical expertise: K.J. Anstrom, E.D. Peterson, Y. Li, L.K. Shaw.
-
Obtaining of funding: S.M. Al-Khatib, R.M. Califf.
-
Administrative, technical, or logistic support: R.M. Califf.
-
Collection and assembly of data: S.M. Al-Khatib, K.J. Anstrom, Y. Li, L.K. Shaw.
RSS Feeds









