ArticleHeart rhythm O22024
Cost savings associated with extended battery longevity in cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators.
Article in Heart rhythm O2, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Global evidence on the cost-effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy for heart failure: a systematic review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Cost-reduction strategies for cardiac implantable electronic devices: Increased battery capacity and beyond.Heart rhythm O2 · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillators (CRT-D) are devices established as treatment for symptomatic heart failure patients at risk of sudden cardiac death. Battery depletion poses a significant clinical and economic burden; extended service life may reduce costs because of generator changes and associated complications. Objective: This study estimated cost-savings associated with extended battery longevity in Medicare patients receiving CRT-D implantation. Methods: A decision tree was used to explore 3 battery capacities: 1.0 ampere-hours (Ah), 1.6Ah, and 2.1Ah. Yearly risk of all-cause mortality, device-related complications, and end of battery life were estimated. Over 6 years, estimated costs included device implantation, replacement, follow-up appointments, and complications. Results: The average total costs to Medicare over 6 years were $41,527, $48,515, and $56,647 per person (USD 2023) for the 2.1 Ah, 1.6 Ah, and 1.0 Ah, respectively. The total per-person replacement cost for the 1.0-Ah devices was more than 4 times that of the 2.1-Ah devices ($20,126 vs $5,006). When extrapolated to the total number of CRT-D implants over a 6-year period, the difference in costs between 2.1-Ah and 1.0-Ah battery capacity exceeded $500 million. Conclusion: Extended longevity CRT-D batteries demonstrate significant cost savings to Medicare over 6 years. These data indicate long-term economic considerations should be included in device selection.
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.