An Economic Analysis of the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement (SAVE) Study
- 31 Downloads
Recent studies have shown that ACE inhibitors reduce morbidity and mortality after myocardial infarction (MI). While these trials have obvious clinical implications, the widespread introduction of a new treatment for a condition as common as MI also has clear cost implications.
The results of the post-MI studies with ACE inhibitors suggest that restricted use of treatment — in high-risk patients — is likely to be most cost effective, whereas treatment of all MI survivors, many of whom are at low risk, will be least cost effective. An approach somewhere in between may maximise clinical benefit at an acceptable cost. Economic analysis may help in deciding how these drugs might be best used after MI. We have conducted a cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis of the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement (SAVE) study, which reported the benefit of ACE inhibitors in intermediate-risk patients.
Assuming all MI survivors require measurement of left ventricular function before selection for treatment (the approach used in the SAVE study), the incremental cost per life-year gained (LYG), over 4 years, using prophylactic captopril is approximately 10 000 pounds sterling (£) [1994 to 1995 values]. The cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) is similar.
These incremental cost per LYG and cost per QALY ratios compare favourably with other commonly used symptomatic and prophylactic treatments, and argue for extending post-MI use of ACE inhibitors to intermediate- as well as high-risk patients.
KeywordsAdis International Limited Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Captopril National Health Service
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Department of Health and National Health Service (NHS) Management Executive. Assessing the options: CHD/Stroke. Target: effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of interventions to reduce CHD and stroke mortality. London: UK Department of Health and NHS; 1995 Feb. Document no.: F50/076 2004 1P I0KGoogle Scholar
- 6.Hart W, Rhodes G, McMurray JJV. The cost effectiveness of enalapril in the treatment of chronic heart failure. Br J Med Econ 1993; 6: 91–8Google Scholar
- 7.The Acute Infarction Ramipril Efficacy (AIRE) Study Investigators. Effect of ramipril on mortality and morbidity of survivors of acute myocardial infarction with clinical evidence of heart failure. Lancet 1993; 342: 821–8Google Scholar
- 9.Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell’Infarto Miocardico. GISSI-3: effects of lisinopril and transdermal glyceryl trinitrate singly and together on 6 weeks mortality and ventricular function after acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1994; 343: 1115–22Google Scholar
- 10.ISIS Collaborative Group. A randomised factorial trial assessing early oral captopril, oral mononitrate and intravenous magnesium sulphate in 58,050 patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1994; 345: 669–85Google Scholar
- 12.Piercy J, Phillips Z. Costing of cardiology services in the United Kingdom. York: York Health Economics Consortium, 1995Google Scholar
- 14.National Health Service (NHS) drug tariff. London: HMSO; 1994 MayGoogle Scholar
- 15.British National Formulary No. 27. London: British Medical Association and the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, 1994Google Scholar
- 23.van Hout BA, Wielink G, Bonsel GJ, et al. Heart failure and ACE inhibitors. Rotterdam: Erasmus University, 1993. IMTA report no.: 92.13Google Scholar