These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: Economic and health consequences of managing bradycardia with dual-chamber compared to single-chamber ventricular pacemakers in Italy. Author: Deniz HB, Caro JJ, Ward A, Moller J, Malik F. Journal: J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown); 2008 Jan; 9(1):43-50. PubMed ID: 18268418. Abstract: OBJECTIVE: This study sought to estimate the economic implications of managing bradycardia due to sinoatrial node disease or atrioventricular block with dual compared to single-chamber ventricular pacemakers from an Italian government perspective. Dual-chamber pacemakers lower the risk of developing atrial fibrillation and pacemaker syndrome. METHODS: A discrete event simulation of a patient's course for 5 years following pacemaker implantation. Each patient may experience the following: complications, pacemaker syndrome, atrial fibrillation, stroke, or death. Risk functions were based on published data from the Canadian Trial of Physiologic Pacing and Mode Selection Trial in Sinus-Node Dysfunction. Identical patients were simulated after receiving a single or dual-chamber pacemaker. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and direct medical costs were estimated (2004 Euros). Benefits and costs were discounted at 3%. RESULTS: The model predicts that implanting the dual-chamber device in 1000 patients will prevent 36 patients from developing atrial fibrillation, 168 from developing severe pacemaker syndrome, but will lead to 13 additional hospitalizations with complications over 5 years. Health benefits are achieved at an incremental cost of 23 euros per patient, and 0.09 QALY, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of euro 260 euros/QALY. Sensitivity analysis shows that device replacement rates due to pacemaker syndrome have the biggest impact on the final results. CONCLUSIONS: In the long term, higher initial costs of the dual-chamber device may be offset by a reduction in costs associated with reoperations and atrial fibrillation.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]