Cost-Effectiveness of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease and Acute Coronary Syndromes in the US Medicare Program

Link to article at PubMed

J Am Heart Assoc. 2021 Mar 31:e019391. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.120.019391. Online ahead of print.


Background Coronary revascularization provides important long-term clinical benefits to patients with high-risk presentations of coronary artery disease, including those with chronic kidney disease. The cost-effectiveness of coronary interventions in this setting is not known. Methods and Results We developed a Markov cohort simulation model to assess the cost-effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with chronic kidney disease who were hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction or unstable angina. Model inputs were primarily drawn from a sample of 14 300 patients identified using the Medicare 20% sample. Survival, quality-adjusted life-years, costs, and cost-effectiveness were projected over a 20-year time horizon. Multivariable models indicated higher 30-day mortality and end-stage renal disease with both PCI and CABG, and higher stroke with CABG, relative to medical therapy. However, the model projected long-term gains of 0.72 quality-adjusted life-years (0.97 life-years) for PCI compared with medical therapy, and 0.93 quality-adjusted life-years (1.32 life-years) for CABG compared with PCI. Incorporation of long-term costs resulted in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $65 326 per quality-adjusted life-year gained for PCI versus medical therapy, and $101 565 for CABG versus PCI. Results were robust to changes in input parameters but strongly influenced by the background costs of the population, and the time horizon. Conclusions For patients with chronic kidney disease and high-risk coronary artery disease presentations, PCI and CABG were both associated with markedly increased costs as well as gains in quality-adjusted life expectancy, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios indicating intermediate value in health economic terms.

PMID:33787323 | DOI:10.1161/JAHA.120.019391

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *