Advertisement

The Real Economic Impact of the MADIT-II Study on the European Medical Community

  • G. Boriani
  • M. Biffi
  • C. Martignani
  • C. Camanini
  • C. Valzania
  • I. Diemberger
  • C. Greco
  • A. Branzi
Conference paper

Abstract

One of the most relevant problems in current cardiological practice is the possibility of implementing, in patients who have a specific indication, a series of treatments of proven efficacy but of high cost. This problem involves percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and cardioverter-defibrillators (CDs) [1]. Table 1 shows the number of procedures performed in the year 2000 in the European Union (15 countries) and in the whole of Europe (33 countries). As the table shows, the increase in population obtained by adding 18 countries to those within the European Union is not followed by a parallel increase in the number of high-cost procedures, suggesting marked difficulties due to economic reasons in using these treatments in routine daily practice.

Keywords

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Implantation Rate Implantable Defibrillator Implantable Cardiac Defibrillator Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Simoons ML (2003) Cardio-vascular disease in Europe: challenges for the medical profession. Eur Heart J 24:8–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Camm AJ, Nisam S (2000) The utilization of the implantable defibrillator: a European enigma. Eur Heart J 21:1998–2004PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boriani G, Biffi M, Martignani C et al (2001) Cost-effectiveness of implantable cardio-verter-defibrillators. Eur Heart J 22:990–996PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Seidl K, Senges J (2002) Geographic differences in implantable cardioverter defibrillator usage. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 13(1 Suppl):S100–105PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gregoratos G, Abrams J, Epstein AE et al (2002) ACC/AHA/NASPE 2002 guideline update for implantation of cardiac pacemakers and antiarrhythmia devices: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines (ACC/AHA/NASPE committee to update the 1998 pacemaker guidelines). J Am Coll Cardiol 40:1703–1719PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Priori SG, Aliot E, Blomstrom-Lundqvist C et al (2001) Task force on sudden cardiac death of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 16:1374–1450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ruskin JN, Camm AJ, Zipes DP et al (2002) Implantable cardioverter defibrillator utilization based on discharge diagnoses from Medicare and managed care patients. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 13:38–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pathmanathan RK, Lau EW, Cooper J et al (1998) Potential impact of antiarrhythmic drugs versus implantable defibrillators on the management of ventricular arrhythmias: the Midlands trial of empirical amiodarone versus electrophysiologically guided intervention and cardioverter implant registry data. Heart 80:68–70PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Moss AJ, Hall J, Cannom DS et al (1996) Improved survival with an implantable defibrillator in patients with coronary disease at high risk for ventricular arrhythmia. Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial Investigators. N Engl J Med 335:1933–1940PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Boersma H, Doornbos G, Bloemberg BPM et al (1999) Cardiovascular diseases in Europe. European Society of Cardiology, Sophia Antipolis, France, pp 1–60Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bigger JT (2002) Expanding indications for implantable cardiac defibrillators. N Engl JMed 346:931–933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zareba W (2002) Late breaking clinical trials: noninvasive electrocardiology and outcome in MADIT II patients. NASPE 2002,23rd scientific session, San Diego, 8-11 May 2002, available at www.naspe.org Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zipes DP (2001) Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: a Volkswagen or a Rolls Royce: how much will we pay to save a life? Circulation 103:1372–1374PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cleland JG, Thackray S, Goodge L et al (2002) Outcome studies with device therapy in patients with heart failure. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 13(1 Suppl):S73–S91PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bradley DJ, Bradley EA, Baughman KL et al (2003) Cardiac resynchronization and death from progressive heart failure. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JAMA 289:730–740PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bristow MR (2003) Cardiac resynchronization therapy reduces hospitalizations, and cardiac resynchronization therapy and implantable defibrillator reduce mortality in chronic heart failure. Results of the COMPANION trial. Late breaking clinical trials. American College of Cardiology, 52nd Annual Scientific Session, Chicago, 30 March to 2 April 2003Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Boriani
    • 1
  • M. Biffi
    • 1
  • C. Martignani
    • 1
  • C. Camanini
    • 1
  • C. Valzania
    • 1
  • I. Diemberger
    • 1
  • C. Greco
    • 1
  • A. Branzi
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of CardiologyUniversity of Bologna, Policlinico S.Orsola-MalpighiBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations