Cost comparison of four revascularisation procedures for the treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease

References

• Holmes DR, Jr, Firth BG, Wood DL. Paradigm shifts in cardiovascular medicine. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2004; 43: 507–512
   Google Scholar
• Rose EA. Off-pump coronary-artery bypass surgery. New England Journal of Medicine 2003; 348: 379–380
   Google Scholar
• Yang YM, Moussa I. Percutaneous coronary intervention and drug-eluting stents. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2005; 172: 323–325.
   Google Scholar
• Serruys PW, Kutryk MJ, Ong AT. Coronary-artery stents. New England Journal of Medicine 2006; 354: 483–495
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angelini GD, Taylor FC, Reeves BC, et al. Early and midterm outcome after off-pump and on-pump surgery in Beating Heart Against Cardioplegic Arrest Studies (BHACAS 1 and 2): a pooled analysis of two randomised controlled trials. Lancet 2002; 359: 1194–1199
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nathoe HM, Van Dijk D, Jansen EW, et al. A comparison of on-pump and off-pump coronary bypass surgery in low-risk patients. New England Journal of Medicine 2003; 348: 394–402
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moses JW, Leon MB, Popma JJ, et al. Sirolimus-eluting stents versus standard stents in patients with stenosis in a native coronary artery. New England Journal of Medicine 2003; 349: 1315–1323
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone GW, Ellis SG, Cox DA, et al. A polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease. New England Journal of Medicine 2004; 350: 221–231
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sibbald B. Declining CABG rate means fewer jobs for surgeons. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2005; 173: 583–584.
   Google Scholar
• Ulrich MR, Brock DM, Ziskind AA. Analysis of trends in coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention rates in Washington state from 1987 to 2001. American Journal of Cardiology 2003; 92: 836–839
   Google Scholar
• Poyen V, Silvestri M, Labrunie P, et al. Indications of coronary angioplasty and stenting in 2003: what is left to surgery?. Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2003; 44: 307–312
   Google Scholar
• Brophy JM. The dollars and sense of drug-eluting stents. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2005; 172: 361–362
   Google Scholar
• Ong AT, Serruys PW. Drug-eluting stents: current issues. Texas Heart Institute Journal 2005; 32: 372–377
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shrive FM, Ghali WA, Lewis S, et al. Moving beyond the cost per quality-adjusted life year: modelling the budgetary impact and clinical outcomes associated with the use of sirolimus-eluting stents. Canadian Journal of Cardiology 2005; 21: 783–787
   Google Scholar
• Mittmann N, Brown A, Seung SJ, et al. Economic Evaluation of Drug Eluting Stents., Technology Report 53. Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Budget 2004: Health Care, Learning and Communities. Canada: Department of Finance, 2006
   Google Scholar
• Serruys PW, Unger F, Sousa JE, et al. Comparison of coronary-artery bypass surgery and stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease. New England Journal of Medicine 2001; 344: 1117–1124
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SoS Investigators. Coronary artery bypass surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (the Stent or Surgery trial): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2002; 360: 965–970
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriguez A, Bernardi V, Navia J, et al. Argentine randomized study: coronary angioplasty with stenting versus coronary bypass surgery in patients with multiple-vessel disease (ERACI II): 30-day and one-year follow-up results. ERACI II Investigators. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2001; 37: 51–58
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrison DA, Sethi G, Sacks J, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery for patients with medically refractory myocardial ischemia and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass: a multicenter, randomized trial. Investigators of the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study #385, the Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation (AWESOME). Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2001; 38: 143–149
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ascione R, Lloyd CT, Underwood MJ, et al. Economic outcome of off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery: a prospective randomized study. Annals of Thoracic Surgery 1999; 68: 2237–2242
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puskas JD, Williams WH, Mahoney EM, et al. Off-pump vs conventional coronary artery bypass grafting: early and 1-year graft patency, cost, and quality-of-life outcomes: a randomized trial. Journal of the American Medical Association 2004; 291: 1841–1849
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen DJ, Bakhai A, Shi C, et al. Cost-effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stents for treatment of complex coronary stenoses: results from the Sirolimus-Eluting Balloon Expandable Stent in the Treatment of Patients With De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions (SIRIUS) Trial. Circulation 2004; 110: 508–514
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weintraub WS, Mahoney EM, Zhang Z, et al. One year comparison of costs of coronary surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in the stent or surgery trial. Heart 2004; 90: 782–788
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eefting F, Nathoe H, Van Dijk D, et al. Randomized comparison between stenting and off-pump bypass surgery in patients referred for angioplasty. Circulation 2003; 108: 2870–2876
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stroupe KT, Morrison DA, Hlatky MA, et al. Cost-effectiveness of coronary artery bypass grafts versus percutaneous coronary intervention for revascularization of high-risk patients. Circulation 2006; 114: 1251–1257
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Statistics Canada. Consumer Price Index. CANSIM Catalogue No. 62-001-XPE, Vol. 86, No. 8. 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Babapulle MN, Joseph L, Belisle P, et al. A hierarchical Bayesian meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials of drug-eluting stents. Lancet 2004; 364: 583–591.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tu JV, Bowen J, Chiu M, et al. Effectiveness and safety of drug-eluting stents in Ontario. New England Journal of Medicine 2007; 357: 1393–1402
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng DC, Bainbridge D, Martin JE, et al. Does off-pump coronary artery bypass reduce mortality, morbidity, and resource utilization when compared with conventional coronary artery bypass? A meta-analysis of randomized trials. Anesthesiology 2005; 102: 188–203
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serruys PW, Ong AT, Morice MC, et al. Arterial revascularization therapies study party II—sirolimus-eluting stents for the treatment of patients with multivessel de novo coronary artery lesions. EuroInterv 2005; 1: 147–156.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bakhai A, Stone GW, Grines CL, et al. Cost-effectiveness of coronary stenting and abciximab for patients with acute myocardial infarction: results from the CADILLAC (Controlled Abciximab and Device Investigation to Lower Late Angioplasty Complications) trial. Circulation 2003; 108: 2857–2863
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cowper PA, Udayakumar K, Sketch MH, Jr, et al. Economic effects of prolonged clopidogrel therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2005; 45: 369–376
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beinart SC, Kolm P, Veledar E, et al. Long-term cost effectiveness of early and sustained dual oral antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel given for up to one year after percutaneous coronary intervention: results from the Clopidogrel for the Reduction of Events During Observation (CREDO) trial. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2005; 46: 761–769
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamy A, Yusuf S, Pogue J, et al. Cost implications of the use of ramipril in high-risk patients based on the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) study. Circulation 2003; 107: 960–965
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamy A, Wang X, Kent R, et al. Economic evaluation of the MEDENOX trial: a Canadian perspective. Medical Patients with Enoxaparin. Canadian Respiratory Journal 2002; 9: 169–177.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smith KM, Lamy A, Arthur HM, et al. Outcomes and costs of coronary artery bypass grafting: comparison between octogenarians and septuagenarians at a tertiary care centre. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2001; 165: 759–764
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. Ontario Drug Benefit Formulary. No. 38. Toronto, Canada: Ministry of Health, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. Schedule of Benefits: physician Services under the Health Insurance Act. Toronto, Canada: The Ministry, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, et al. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Oxford University Press, New York, NY 1996
   Google Scholar
• Kini AS. Revascularization in diabetics: FREEDOM Trial Update. 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Shrive FM, Manns BJ, Galbraith PD, et al. Economic evaluation of sirolimus-eluting stents. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2005; 172: 345–351.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawkins KD. Multivessel DES or CABG SYNTAX Trial. 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Kaul S, Diamond GA. An ounce of prevention for a pound of flesh?. CardioSource 11 October, 2006
   Google Scholar
• Eisenstein EL, Anstrom KJ, Kong DF, et al. Clopidogrel use and long-term clinical outcomes after drug-eluting stent implantation. Journal of the American Medical Association 2007; 297: 159–168
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griffiths H, Bakhai A, West D, et al. Feasibility and cost of treatment with drug eluting stents of surgical candidates with multi-vessel coronary disease. European Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery 2004; 26: 528–534
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ong AT, van der Giessen WJ. Drug-eluting stents for interventional revascularization of coronary multivessel disease. Journal of Interventional Cardiology 2005; 18: 447–453
   Google Scholar
• Kahn JK, O'Neill WW. Two vessels or not two vessels? That is the question. American Heart Journal 2002; 143: 948–949
   Google Scholar
• Nikolsky E, Halabi M, Roguin A, et al. Staged versus one-step approach for multivessel percutaneous coronary interventions. American Heart Journal 2002; 143: 1017–1026
   Google Scholar
• Keeley EC, Boura JA, Grines CL. Comparison of primary and facilitated percutaneous coronary interventions for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: quantitative review of randomised trials. Lancet 2006; 367: 579–588
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antman EM, Hand M, Armstrong PW. 2007 focused update of the ACC/AHA 2004 guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2008; 51: 210–247
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mehta SR, Cannon CP, Fox KA, et al. Routine vs selective invasive strategies in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a collaborative meta-analysis of randomized trials. Journal of the American Medical Association. 2005; 293: 2908–2917
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metra M, et al. Early vs. delayed timing of intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (TIMACS), ClinicalTrials.govNCT00552513.
   Google Scholar
• Boden WE. Is it time to reassess the optimal timing of coronary artery bypass graft surgery following acute myocardial infarction?. American Journal of Cardiology 2002; 90: 35–38
   Google Scholar
• Zaroff JG, di Tommaso DG, Barron HV. A risk model derived from the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2 database for predicting mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting during acute myocardial infarction. American Journal of Cardiology 2002; 90: 1–4
   Google Scholar
• Hannan EL, Racz MJ, Walford G, et al. Long-term outcomes of coronary-artery bypass grafting versus stent implantation. New England Journal of Medicine 2005; 352: 2174–2183
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malenka DJ, Leavitt BJ, Hearne MJ, et al. Comparing long-term survival of patients with multivessel coronary disease after CABG or PCI: analysis of BARI-like patients in northern New England. Circulation 2005; 112((9 Suppl):)I371–I376
   Google Scholar