Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33771104›Full record

ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2021

Cost-impact analysis of baroreflex activation therapy in chronic heart failure patients in the United States.

John Bisognano, John E Schneider, Shawn Davies, Robert L Ohsfeldt, Elizabeth Galle, Ivana Stojanovic, Thomas F Deering, JoAnn Lindenfeld, Michael R Zile

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Neuromodulation devices for heart failureEuropean heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

John BisognanoUniversity of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.
John E SchneiderAvalon Health Economics, Morristown, NJ, USA.
Shawn DaviesAvalon Health Economics, Morristown, NJ, USA. Shawn.davies@avalonecon.com.ORCID 0000-0003-4723-5176
Robert L OhsfeldtTexas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.
Elizabeth GalleCVRx Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Ivana StojanovicCVRx Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Thomas F DeeringPiedmont Heart Institute, Atlanta, GA, USA.
JoAnn LindenfeldVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Michael R ZileMedical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.
Avalon Pharma (United States) · USCVRx (United States) · USMedical University of South Carolina · USPiedmont Atlanta Hospital · USTexas A&M University · USUniversity of Rochester Medical Center · USVanderbilt University Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe study evaluated the cost of baroreflex activation therapy plus guideline directed therapy (BAT + GDT) compared to GDT alone for HF patients with reduced ejection fraction and New York Heart Association Class III or II (with a recent history of III). Baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) is delivered by an implantable device that stimulates the baroreceptors through an electrode attached to the outside of the carotid artery, which rebalances the autonomic nervous system to regain cardiovascular (CV) homeostasis. The BeAT-HF trial evaluated the safety and effectiveness of BAT.

methodsA cost impact model was developed from a U.S. health care payer or integrated delivery network perspective over a 3-year period for BAT + GDT versus GDT alone. Expected costs were calculated by utilizing 6-month data from the BeAT-HF trial and existing literature. HF hospitalization rates were extrapolated based on improvement in NT-proBNP.

resultsAt baseline the expected cost of BAT + GDT were $29,526 per patient more than GDT alone due to BAT device and implantation costs. After 3 years, the predicted cost per patient was $9521 less expensive for BAT + GDT versus GDT alone due to lower rates of significant HF hospitalizations, CV non-HF hospitalizations, and resource intensive late-stage procedures (LVADs and heart transplants) among the BAT + GDT group.

conclusionsBAT + GDT treatment becomes less costly than GDT alone beginning between years 1 and 2 and becomes less costly cumulatively between years 2 and 3, potentially providing significant savings over time. As additional BeAT-HF trial data become available, the model can be updated to show longer term effects.

Indexed as

BaroreflexHealth Care CostsChronic DiseaseCost-Benefit AnalysisCost SavingsElectric Stimulation TherapyHeart FailureHumansModels, EconomicOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CarePressoreceptorsTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeUnited StatesBaroreflex activation therapyCostsEconomicHeart failure

Identifiers

PMID33771104
PMCPMC7995802
OpenAlexW3138183286

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.