ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Cost-effectiveness analysis of bridge-to-transplantation temporary mechanical circulatory support versus non-bridged heart transplantation.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Among patients undergoing heart transplantation, BTT-tMCS therapy demonstrates superior clinical efficacy compared to nonbridged HTx; however, its cost-effectiveness among Chinese patients remain uncertain. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of BTT-tMCS therapy compared with nonbridged HTx among transplant-eligible Chinese patients from the healthcare payer's perspective. Methods: The cost-effectiveness analysis for this economic evaluation was conducted at a qualified heart transplantation center in Central China. Participants included patients admitted since 2018 who underwent either BTT-tMCS or nonbridged HTx, identified retrospectively from local electronic medical records and supplemented by corresponding questionnaires. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to obtain a homogeneous group of HTx patients to generate model input parameters. A Markov model simulates lifetime disease progression and associated costs for HTx patients, with monetary values standardized to 2023. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the internal validity of the model's conclusions. The model evaluated two competing treatment strategies: BTT-tMCS and standard care. Lifetime health care cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of the simulated cohort. Results: PSM identified 40 matched subjects who met the predefined criteria, creating a homogeneous cohort for analysis. Compared to nonbridged HTx, BTT-tMCS yielded higher lifetime incremental costs (510,361 RMB) and effects (5.88 QALYs), resulting in an ICER of 28966.88 RMB/QALY. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated the robustness of these findings, with a 90% probability of cost-effectiveness achieved at a willingness-to-pay threshold exceeding 80422.20 RMB/QALY. Conclusion: In this economic evaluation study, BTT-tMCS therapy was more likely to be cost-effective compared with non-bridged HTx.
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.