Coronary artery bypass graft surgery was more costly than DES-PCI over a lifetime horizon but yielded a favorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $16,537 per QALY gained.
RCT (n=1,800)
randomized
Is CABG cost-effective compared to DES-PCI in patients with 3-vessel or left main coronary artery disease?
CABG is an economically attractive strategy compared to DES-PCI for most patients with complex 3-vessel or left main CAD, with an ICER of $16,537/QALY.
Effect estimate: ICER $16,537/QALY
BACKGROUND: The Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) trial demonstrated that in patients with 3-vessel or left main coronary artery disease, coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) was associated with a lower rate of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeat revascularization compared with percutaneous coronary revascularization with drug-eluting stents (DES-PCI) ). The long-term cost-effectiveness of these strategies is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between 2005 and 2007, 1800 patients with left main or 3-vessel coronary artery disease were randomized to CABG (n=897) or DES-PCI (n=903). Costs were assessed from a US perspective, and health state utilities were evaluated with the EuroQOL questionnaire. A patient-level microsimulation model based on the 5-year in-trial data was used to extrapolate costs, life expectancy, and quality-adjusted life expectancy over a lifetime horizon. Although initial procedural costs were 3415 per patient lower with CABG, total hospitalization costs were 10 036 per patient higher. Over the next 5 years, follow-up costs were higher with DES-PCI as a result of more frequent hospitalizations, revascularization procedures, and higher medication costs. Over a lifetime horizon, CABG remained more costly than DES-PCI, but the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was favorable (16 537 per quality-adjusted life-year gained) and remained <20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year in most bootstrap replicates. Results were consistent across a wide range of assumptions about the long-term effect of CABG versus DES-PCI on events and costs. In patients with left main disease or a SYNTAX score ≤22, however, DES-PCI was economically dominant compared with CABG, although these findings were less certain. CONCLUSIONS: For most patients with 3-vessel or left main coronary artery disease, CABG is a clinically and economically attractive revascularization strategy compared with DES-PCI. However, among patients with less complex disease, DES-PCI may be preferred on both clinical and economic grounds. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: www. clinicaltrials. gov. Unique identifier: NCT00114972.
Cohen et al. (Sat,) conducted a rct in 3-vessel or left main coronary artery disease (n=1,800). Coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) vs. Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (DES-PCI) was evaluated on Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained) (ICER $16,537/QALY). Coronary artery bypass graft surgery was more costly than DES-PCI over a lifetime horizon but yielded a favorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $16,537 per QALY gained.