ArticleAnnals of internal medicine2015
Cost-Effectiveness of Adding Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy to an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Among Patients With Mild Heart Failure.
Article in Annals of internal medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global evidence on the cost-effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy for heart failure: a systematic review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Economic Evaluations in Electrophysiology in the Last 15 Years: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Cost-minimization analysis of a wearable cardioverter defibrillator in adult patients undergoing ICD explant procedures: Clinical and economic implications.Clinical cardiology · 2021Pooled it
- Cost-Effectiveness of Remote Cardiac Monitoring With the CardioMEMS Heart Failure System.Clinical cardiology · 2017Trial
- Cost-Effectiveness of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators in Surgically Repaired Tetralogy of Fallot.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Economic Issues in Heart Failure in the United States.Journal of cardiac failure · 2022Review
- Cost-effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy plus an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in patients with heart failure: a systematic review.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2021Review
- Saudi Heart Association (SHA) guidelines for the management of heart failure.Journal of the Saudi Heart Association · 2019Review
- Economic evaluation of cardiac magnetic resonance with fast-SENC in the diagnosis and management of early heart failure.Health economics review · 2019Article
- The economics of heart failure care.Progress in cardiovascular diseasesReview
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces mortality and heart failure hospitalizations in patients with mild heart failure.
objectiveTo estimate the cost-effectiveness of adding CRT to an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (CRT-D) compared with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) alone among patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction, prolonged intraventricular conduction, and mild heart failure.
designMarkov decision model. DATA SOURCES: Clinical trials, clinical registries, claims data from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention life tables. TARGET POPULATION: Patients aged 65 years or older with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 30% or less, QRS duration of 120 milliseconds or more, and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class I or II symptoms. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Societal.
interventionCRT-D or ICD alone. OUTCOME MEASURES: Life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Use of CRT-D increased life expectancy (9.8 years versus 8.8 years), QALYs (8.6 years versus 7.6 years), and costs ($286 500 versus $228 600), yielding a cost per QALY gained of $61 700. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSES: The cost-effectiveness of CRT-D was most dependent on the degree of mortality reduction: When the risk ratio for death was 0.95, the ICER increased to $119 600 per QALY. More expensive CRT-D devices, shorter CRT-D battery life, and older age also made the cost-effectiveness of CRT-D less favorable. LIMITATIONS: The estimated mortality reduction for CRT-D was largely based on a single trial. Data on patients with NYHA class I symptoms were limited. The cost-effectiveness of CRT-D in patients with NYHA class I symptoms remains uncertain.
conclusionIn patients with an LVEF of 30% or less, QRS duration of 120 milliseconds or more, and NYHA class II symptoms, CRT-D appears to be economically attractive relative to ICD alone when a reduction in mortality is expected. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health, University of Copenhagen, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.