Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness analysis of fractional flow reserve versus angiography among patients with coronary artery disease undergoing borderline coronary lesions treatment in Iran.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The present study aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of fractional flow reserve (FFR) versus angiography in treating borderline coronary lesions in patients with coronary artery stenosis in Iran. Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of morbidity, mortality, readmission and the most important cause of disability in many countries, including Iran.

Methods

This was a cost-effectiveness study conducted from the perspective of the Ministry of Health in 2019. The effectiveness was determined using four indicators: Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), angina, and number of used stents (mean). Only direct medical costs (DMC) were estimated. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of FFR versus angiography, A decision tree model was built by patient's level data.To coping with uncertainty Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was performed.

Results

Totally, 98 cases of FFR and 238 cases of angiography were included in the analysis. The average of QALY in FFR and angiography were 0.853 and 0.787, respectively. The cost of these methods were $6128 and $8388, correspondingly. Therefore, FFR was dominant compared to angiography. Results of the scatter plots and acceptability curve showed that FFR was more cost-effective than angiography in 94% and 96% of simulations for a threshold lower than $11,000 PPP. The PSA analysis confirmed the robustness of the study results.

Conclusion

The results indicated that FFR was more cost-effective than angiography in the cases studied in Iran. Consequently, FFR can be used as a high-priority diagnostic method and it is recommendable to be included in insurance coverage.

SUBMITTER: Keshavarz K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9730590 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-effectiveness analysis of fractional flow reserve versus angiography among patients with coronary artery disease undergoing borderline coronary lesions treatment in Iran.

Keshavarz Khosro K Rezaee Rita R Esmaili Elahe E Mansouri Roohollah R Jafari Abdosaleh A Erami Azadeh A Talebianpour Hamid H Fonseca Ricardo R Fardid Mozhgan M

Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E 20221208 1

<h4>Background</h4>The present study aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of fractional flow reserve (FFR) versus angiography in treating borderline coronary lesions in patients with coronary artery stenosis in Iran. Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of morbidity, mortality, readmission and the most important cause of disability in many countries, including Iran.<h4>Methods</h4>This was a cost-effectiveness study conducted from the perspective of the Ministry of Health in 2019. The ef ...[more]

PMID: 36482396

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAccording to recent guidelines, patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) should undergo revascularization if significant myocardial ischemia is present. Both, cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) allow for a reliable ischemia assessment and in combination with anatomical information provided by invasive coronary angiography (CXA), such a work-up sets the basis for a decision to revascularize or not. The cost-effectiveness ratio of these two strategies is compared.MethodsStrategy 1) CMR to assess ischemia followed by CXA in ischemia-positive patients (CMR?+?CXA), Strategy 2) CXA followed by FFR in angiographically positive stenoses (CXA?+?FFR). The costs, evaluated from the third party payer perspective in Switzerland, Germany, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US), included public prices of the different outpatient procedures and costs induced by procedural complications and by diagnostic errors. The effectiveness criterion was the correct identification of hemodynamically significant coronary lesion(s) (= significant CAD) complemented by full anatomical information. Test performances were derived from the published literature. Cost-effectiveness ratios for both strategies were compared for hypothetical cohorts with different pretest likelihood of significant CAD.ResultsCMR + CXA and CXA + FFR were equally cost-effective at a pretest likelihood of CAD of 62% in Switzerland, 65% in Germany, 83% in the UK, and 82% in the US with costs of CHF 5'794, € 1'517, £ 2'680, and $ 2'179 per patient correctly diagnosed. Below these thresholds, CMR + CXA showed lower costs per patient correctly diagnosed than CXA + FFR.ConclusionsThe CMR?+?CXA strategy is more cost-effective than CXA?+?FFR below a CAD prevalence of 62%, 65%, 83%, and 82% for the Swiss, the German, the UK, and the US health care systems, respectively. These findings may help to optimize resource utilization in the diagnosis of CAD.

Project description:Backgroundintravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) have both been shown to be superior to angiography in optimizing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, there is still a lack of comparative studies between PCI optimization using physiology and intravascular imaging head-to-head. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of FFR and IVUS PCI optimization strategies on the functional PCI result (assessed with FFR) immediately post-PCI and at 9-12 months after the treatment of long coronary lesions.MethodsThis was a single-center study comparing post-PCI FFR between two different PCI optimization strategies (FFR and IVUS). The study included 154 patients who had hemodynamically significant long lesions, necessitating a stent length of 30 mm or more. The procedural outcomes were functional PCI result immediately post-PCI and at 9-12 months after treatment. Clinical outcomes included target vessel failure (TVF) and functional target vessel restenosis rate during follow-up.ResultsBaseline clinical characteristics and FFR (0.65 [0.55-0.71]) did not differ significantly between the two groups and the left anterior descending artery was treated in 82% of cases. The FFR optimization strategy resulted in a significantly shorter stented segment (49 mm vs. 63 mm, p = 0.001) compared to the IVUS optimization strategy. Although the rates of optimal functional PCI result (FFR > 0.9) did not significantly differ between the FFR and IVUS optimization strategies, a proportion of patients in the FFR group (12%) experienced poor post-PCI functional outcome with FFR values ≤ 0.8, which was not observed in the IVUS group. At the 9-12 month follow-up, 20% of patients in the FFR group had target-vessel-related myocardial ischemia, compared to 6% in the IVUS group. The rates of TVF and functional target vessel restenosis during follow-up were also numerically higher in the FFR optimization group.ConclusionsThe use of FFR PCI optimization strategy in the treatment of long coronary artery lesions is associated with a higher incidence of poor functional PCI result and larger myocardial ischemia burden at follow-up compared to the IVUS optimization strategy. However, this discrepancy did not translate into a statistically significant difference in clinical outcomes. This study highlights the importance of using IVUS to optimize long lesions functional PCI outcomes.

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness analysis of fractional flow reserve versus angiography among patients with coronary artery disease undergoing borderline coronary lesions treatment in Iran.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Cost-effectiveness analysis of fractional flow reserve versus angiography among patients with coronary artery disease undergoing borderline coronary lesions treatment in Iran.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets