This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 108/23/2857    most recent 01.CIR.0000103121.26241.FAv1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Bakhai, A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Bakhai, A. Related Collections Health policy and outcome research Acute myocardial infarction Platelet function inhibitors Catheter-based coronary interventions: stents Related Article

(Circulation. 2003;108:2857.)
© 2003 American Heart Association, Inc.

Clinical Investigation and Reports

Cost-Effectiveness of Coronary Stenting and Abciximab for Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction

Results From the CADILLAC (Controlled Abciximab and Device Investigation to Lower Late Angioplasty Complications) Trial

Ameet Bakhai, MD, MRCP; Gregg W. Stone, MD; Cindy L. Grines, MD; Sabina A. Murphy, MPH; Louise Githiora, BA; Ronna H. Berezin, MPH; David A. Cox, MD; Thomas Stuckey, MD; John J. Griffin, MD; James E. Tcheng, MD; David J. Cohen, MD, MSc, for the CADILLAC Investigators

From the Harvard Clinical Research Institute (A.B., S.A.M., L.G., R.H.B., D.J.C.), the Division of Cardiology, Beth Israel-Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Mass (A.B., D.J.C.); the Clinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK (A.B.); Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, NY (G.W.S.); William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, Mich (C.L.G.); Mid-Carolina Cardiology, Charlotte, NC (D.A.C.); Moses Cone Memorial Hospital, Greensboro, NC (T.S.); Virginia Beach General Hospital, Virginia Beach, Va (J.J.G.); and Duke University, Durham, NC (J.E.T.).

Correspondence to David J. Cohen, MD, Cardiovascular Division, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA 02215. E-mail dcohen{at}caregroup.harvard.edu

Received August 8, 2003; revision received September 23, 2003; accepted September 25, 2003.

Background— Both stenting and the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor abciximab improve outcomes for patients undergoing primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, the cost-effectiveness of these strategies is unknown.

Methods and Results— We performed a prospective cost-utility analysis among US participants in the CADILLAC trial. Patients with AMI (n=1703) were randomized to stenting versus balloon angioplasty (PTCA) and abciximab versus no abciximab according to a 2-by-2 factorial design. Total 1-year costs and lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, measured as cost per quality-adjusted year of life (QALY) gained, were calculated. Compared with PTCA, stenting increased procedural costs by $1148 and initial hospital costs by $1384 (both P<0.001). By 1-year, stenting led to fewer repeat revascularization procedures and reduced follow-up medical care costs by $1215, such that aggregate costs were similar for the PTCA and stent groups ($18 690 versus $18 859, P=0.75). The cost-effectiveness ratio for stenting versus PTCA was favorable at $11 237/QALY gained and remained <$20 000/QALY in sensitivity analyses. Compared with standard anticoagulation, abciximab increased initial procedural costs by $1122 (P<0.001). By facilitating accelerated hospital discharge, abciximab reduced length of stay by 0.6 days, offsetting most of the drug costs. These cost offsets were not maintained, however; aggregate 1-year costs for the abciximab group were $1244 greater than for standard therapy ($19 389 versus $18 145, P=0.02). Abciximab was reasonably cost-effective (cost-effectiveness ratio $21 305/QALY) only if nonsignificant differences in 1-year mortality (3.7% versus 4.3%, P=0.62) were incorporated in the analysis.

Conclusions— Primary stenting is a highly cost-effective treatment for AMI. The cost-effectiveness of abciximab in this setting is uncertain and depends primarily on whether long-term survival is enhanced.

Key Words: angioplasty • myocardial infarction • stents • cost-benefit analysis

Related Article:

Are Stenting and Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Blockade of Good Value in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention?

Jason H. Cole and William S. Weintraub
Circulation 2003 108: 2831-2833. [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Bakhai, G. W. Stone, E. Mahoney, T. A. Lavelle, C. Shi, R. H. Berezin, B. J. Lahue, M. A. Clark, M. J. Lacey, M. E. Russell, et al. Cost Effectiveness of Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization: Results From the TAXUS-IV Trial J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., July 18, 2006; 48(2): 253 - 261. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Glaser, H. A. Glick, H. C. Herrmann, and S. E. Kimmel The Role of Risk Stratification in the Decision to Provide Upstream Versus Selective Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors for Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., February 7, 2006; 47(3): 529 - 537. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Montalescot Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition and long-term benefit: the stuff of dreams? Eur. Heart J., September 2, 2004; 25(18): 1562 - 1564. [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. M. Krumholz The year in health care delivery and outcomes research J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., September 1, 2004; 44(5): 1130 - 1136. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. H. Cole and W. S. Weintraub Are Stenting and Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Blockade of Good Value in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention? Circulation, December 9, 2003; 108(23): 2831 - 2833. [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. SoRelle Cardiovascular News Circulation, December 9, 2003; 108 (23): e9077 - e9078. [Full Text]