Cost Effectiveness of CABG Versus PCI for Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review
The suitability of CABG compared to PCI for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) remains a controversial issue. Despite growing evidence supporting the clinical efficacy of these revascularization strategies, there is little evidence regarding their long-term cost-effectiveness. The aim of this study was to critically evaluate the literature regarding the cost-effectiveness of CABG compared to PCI and assess the quality of the available economic evidence.The methods is a systematic review was conducted using three databases: PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar. Three studies were retrieved then compared the economic evaluation of CABG vs PCI measures The result is the improvement (ICER) reported across studies varied widely by perspective and timeframe. ICER calculation was reported to be favorable and cost effective for CABG. The conclusions is CABG is more cost-effective than PCI in cases of coronary artery disease. The evidence supporting this cost-effectiveness will continue to evolve and further evaluation over a period of 10 years or more is needed considering societal perspectives.
Anderson, J. L., Heidenreich, P. A., Barnett, P. G., Creager, M. A., Fonarow, G. C., Gibbons, R. J., Halperin, J. L., Hlatky, M. A., Jacobs, A. K., & Mark, D. B. (2014). ACC/AHA statement on cost/value methodology in clinical practice guidelines and performance measures: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures and Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation, 129(22), 2329–2345.
Ariyaratne, T. V, Yap, C., Ademi, Z., Rosenfeldt, F., Duffy, S. J., Billah, B., & Reid, C. M. (2016). A systematic review of cost-effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention vs. surgery for the treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease in the drug-eluting stent era. European Heart Journal–Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes, 2(4), 261–270.
Cesare MD, Bixby H, G. T. (2023). World Heart Report 2023: Confronting the World’s Number One Killer. World Hear Fed. Published online 2023:1-52. https://world-heart-federation.org/wp-content/uploads/World-Heart-Report-2023.pdf.
Cohen, D. J., Osnabrugge, R. L., Magnuson, E. A., Wang, K., Li, H., Chinnakondepalli, K., Pinto, D., Abdallah, M. S., Vilain, K. A., & Morice, M.-C. (2014). Cost-effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents versus bypass surgery for patients with 3-vessel or left main coronary artery disease: final results from the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With TAXUS a. Circulation, 130(14), 1146–1157.
Fakhrzad, N., Barouni, M., Goudarzi, R., Kojuri, J., Jahani, Y., & Tasavon Gholamhoseini, M. (2023). Cost-effectiveness analysis of coronary arteries bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) through drug stent in iran: a comparative study. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 21(1), 16.
Husereau, D., Drummond, M., Petrou, S., Carswell, C., Moher, D., Greenberg, D., Augustovski, F., Briggs, A. H., Mauskopf, J., & Loder, E. (2013). Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS)—explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR health economic evaluation publication guidelines good reporting practices task force. Value in Health, 16(2), 231–250.
Kemenkes, D. P. (2019). Mengenali Tanda dan Gejala Serangan Dini Penyakit Jantung Koroner. P2PTM Kemenkes RI. Published online 2019:30.
Lindstrom, M., DeCleene, N., Dorsey, H., Fuster, V., Johnson, C. O., LeGrand, K. E., Mensah, G. A., Razo, C., Stark, B., & Varieur Turco, J. (2022). Global burden of cardiovascular diseases and risks collaboration, 1990-2021. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 80(25), 2372–2425.
Magnuson, E. A., Chinnakondepalli, K., Vilain, K., Serruys, P. W., Sabik, J. F., Kappetein, A. P., Stone, G. W., Cohen, D. J., & Investigators, E. (2022). Cost-Effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention versus bypass surgery for patients with left main disease: results from the EXCEL trial. Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions, 15(7), e011981.
Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., Stewart, L. A., & Group, P.-P. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic Reviews, 4, 1–9.
Shamseer, L., Moher, D., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., & Stewart, L. A. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. Bmj, 349.
Weiting, H., Yaoxian, A. Z., Keong, Y. K., Lam, S. W., How, L. Y., Sahlén, A. O., Pourghaderi, A., Che, M., Terrance, C. S. J., & Graves, N. (2022). The clinical value and cost-effectiveness of treatments for patients with coronary artery disease. Health Economics Review, 12(1), 56.
Copyright (c) 2024 Trias Roslina, Prastuti Soewondo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
