ArticleCatheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions2025
Cost-Utility Analysis of Different Treatment Modalities in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Thai PCI Registry.
Article in Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCost-utility analyses of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) provide valuable insights into the economic value of these procedures. However, data is lacking, particularly in developing countries with limited resources.
aimsThis analysis aimed to compare the cost-utility of different treatment modalities used for PCI patients within a Thai PCI registry.
methodsClinical and quality-of-life data from 39 hospitals spread throughout Thailand were used in this analysis. Three treatment modalities for PCI procedures were compared: (a) radial versus femoral access, (b) partial versus complete revascularization for multivessel coronary artery disease, and (c) use versus non-use of device-guided PCIs (intracoronary ultrasound, optical coherence tomography, or fractional flow reserve). Cost data were obtained from each patient's bill for their hospital stay. Utility scores were measured using the Thai EQ-5D-5L at admission, discharge, and 1-year postprocedure. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was then estimated and used for each comparison.
resultsOf 19,701 patients enrolled in 2018-19, approximately one-third (n = 7332) had hospital cost data available for analysis. At discharge, the mean costs associated with radial access and partial revascularization were $986 and $391, respectively, less than the costs for device-guided PCIs, which increased by a mean of $2004. The delta utility gains for these approaches were 2.97, 1.60, and 1.07 at discharge and 1.08, 1.06, and 0.29 at 1 year, respectively. The estimated ICERs at 1 year were -$894, -$359, and $7041 per unit of utility gained, respectively.
conclusionRadial access and partial revascularization are cost-effective PCI strategies, while lesion severity assessment devices incur high costs per unit of utility gained. Identifying the factors that influence these outcomes may assist clinicians in tailoring interventions to optimize a patient's quality of life after PCI.
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.