Search

Background: Older adults with comorbidities who are at extreme risk for surgical aortic valve replacement may be appropriate candidates for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). We present the 5-year clinical, echocardiographic, and health status outcomes of such patients treated with CoreValve self-expanding supra-annular TAVR., Methods: The CoreValve US Extreme Risk Pivotal Trial was a prospective, nonrandomized, single-arm clinical trial of TAVR at 41 sites in the United States. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality or major stroke. Secondary outcomes included echocardiographic parameters and patient-reported health status, assessed with the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire., Results: Between February 2011 and August 2012, 639 patients with severe aortic stenosis at extreme surgical risk underwent attempted TAVR (mean age 82.8±8.4 years, 53% women, mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality 10.4±5.6%, 77% iliofemoral access). The 5-year Kaplan-Meier rate of death or major stroke was 72.6% ([95% CI, 68.4%–76.7%]; death 71.6%, major stroke 11.5%), with no significant differences according to access site. Among patients who survived 5 years, mean transvalvular gradient was 7.5±5.9 mm Hg, and 3.1% had moderate or severe aortic regurgitation. Health status measures improved significantly by 1 month after TAVR through 1 year (mean change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire–Overall Summary score 24.8 points [95% CI, 22.4–27.2]). Beyond 1 year, the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire–Overall Summary score decreased gradually but remained significantly improved from pre-TAVR through 5 years of follow-up among surviving patients (mean change from baseline, 14.3 points [95% CI, 10.7–17.9])., Conclusions: Patients with severe aortic stenosis at extreme surgical risk who are treated with self-expanding supra-annular TAVR have high 5-year mortality. However, the short-term benefits of TAVR in terms of valve hemodynamics and quality of life are mostly preserved among surviving patients at 5 years, thereby supporting the continued use of TAVR in these challenging patients., Registration: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01240902.

Background: In patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) at low surgical risk, treatment with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) results in lower rates of death, stroke, and rehospitalization at 1 year compared with surgical aortic valve replacement; however, the effect of treatment strategy on health status is unknown., Objectives: This study sought to compare health status outcomes of TAVR versus surgery in low-risk patients with severe AS., Methods: Between March 2016 and October 2017, 1,000 low-risk patients with AS were randomized to transfemoral TAVR using a balloon-expandable valve or surgery in the PARTNER 3 (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) trial. Health status was assessed at baseline and 1, 6, and 12 months using the KCCQ (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire), SF-36 (Short Form-36 Health Survey), and EQ-5D (EuroQoL). The primary endpoint was change in KCCQ-OS (KCCQ Overall Summary) score over time. Longitudinal growth curve modeling was used to compare changes in health status between treatment groups over time., Results: At 1 month, TAVR was associated with better health status than surgery (mean difference in KCCQ-OS 16.0 points; p < 0.001). At 6 and 12 months, health status remained better with TAVR, although the effect was reduced (mean difference in KCCQ-OS 2.6 and 1.8 points respectively; p < 0.04 for both). The proportion of patients with an excellent outcome (alive with KCCQ-OS ≥75 and no significant decline from baseline) was greater with TAVR than surgery at 6 months (90.3% vs. 85.3%; p = 0.03) and 12 months (87.3% vs. 82.8%; p = 0.07)., Conclusions: Among low-risk patients with severe AS, TAVR was associated with meaningful early and late health status benefits compared with surgery., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: For patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) at extreme surgical risk, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) leads to improved survival and health status when compared with medical therapy. Whether the early health status benefits of TAVR in these patients are sustained beyond 1 year of follow-up is unknown., Methods and Results: Six hundred thirty-nine patients with severe AS at extreme surgical risk underwent TAVR in the CoreValve US Extreme Risk Pivotal trial. Health status was evaluated at baseline and at 1, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ), the Short-Form-12, and the EuroQoL-5D. Analyses were performed using pattern mixture models to account for both death and missing data and were stratified by iliofemoral (IF) and non-iliofemoral (non-IF) access. After TAVR, there was substantial health status improvement in disease-specific and generic scales by 6 to 12 months. Although there were small declines in health status after 12 months, the initial benefits of TAVR were largely sustained through 3 years for both IF and non-IF cohorts (change from baseline in KCCQ Overall Summary score 19.0 points in IF patients and 14.9 points in non-IF patients; P<.01 for both comparisons). Among surviving patients, clinically meaningful (≥10 point) improvements in the KCCQ Overall Summary Score at 3 years were observed in 85.0% and 83.4% of IF and non-IF patients respectively., Conclusions: Among extreme risk patients with severe AS, TAVR resulted in large initial health status benefits that were sustained through 3-year follow-up. Although late mortality was high in this population, these findings demonstrate that TAVR offers substantial and durable health status improvements for surviving patients., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: In patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) at intermediate surgical risk, treatment with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) results in similar 2-year survival. The effect of TAVR vs SAVR on health status in patients at intermediate surgical risk is unknown., Objective: To compare health-related quality of life among intermediate-risk patients with severe AS treated with either TAVR or SAVR., Design, Setting, and Participants: Between December 2011 and November 2013, 2032 intermediate-risk patients with severe AS were randomized to TAVR with the Sapien XT valve or SAVR in the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve 2 Trial and were followed up for 2 years. Data analysis was conducted between March 1, 2016, to April 30, 2017., Main Outcomes and Measures: Health status was assessed at baseline, 1 month, 1 year, and 2 years using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) (23 items covering physical function, social function, symptoms, self-efficacy and knowledge, and quality of life on a 0- to 100-point scale; higher scores indicate better quality of life), Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (36 items covering 8 dimensions of health status as well as physical and mental summary scores; higher scores represent better health status), and EuroQOL-5D (assesses 5 dimensions of general health on a 3-level scale, with utility scores ranging from 0 [death] to 1 [ideal health]). Analysis of covariance was used to examine changes in health status over time, adjusting for baseline status., Results: Of the 2032 randomized patients, baseline health status was available for 1833 individuals (950 TAVR, 883 SAVR) who formed the primary analytic cohort. A total of 1006 (54.9%) of the population were men; mean (SD) age was 81.4 (6.8) years. Over 2 years, both TAVR and SAVR were associated with significant improvements in both disease specific (16-22 points on the KCCQ-OS scale) and generic health status (3.9-5.1 points on the SF-36 physical summary scale). At 1 month, TAVR was associated with better health status than SAVR, but this difference was restricted to patients treated via transfemoral access (mean difference in the KCCQ overall summary [KCCQ-OS] score, 14.1 points; 95% CI, 11.7 to 16.4; P < .01) and was not seen in patients treated via transthoracic access (mean difference in KCCQ-OS, 3.5 points; 95% CI, -1.4 to 8.4; P < .01 for interaction). There were no significant differences between TAVR and SAVR in any health status measures at 1 or 2 years., Conclusions and Relevance: Among intermediate-risk patients with severe AS, health status improved significantly with both TAVR and SAVR through 2 years of follow up. Early health status improvement was greater with TAVR, but only among patients treated via transfemoral access. Longer term follow-up is needed to assess the durability of quality-of-life improvement with TAVR vs SAVR in this population., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01314313.

Background: In the SYNTAX (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) trial, patients with 3-vessel or left main coronary artery disease (CAD) had improved long-term outcomes with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES), improvements driven mainly by differences in myocardial infarction and repeat revascularization., Objectives: This study compared the long-term quality-of-life benefits of DES-PCI versus CABG for patients with 3-vessel or left main CAD., Methods: Between 2005 and 2007, the SYNTAX trial randomized 1,800 patients with 3-vessel or left main CAD to either CABG or DES-PCI. Health status was assessed at baseline and at 1, 6, 12, 36, and 60 months by using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey., Results: At 5-year follow-up, CABG was superior to DES-PCI on several SAQ domains including angina frequency and physical function, as well as the role physical and role emotional scales of the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey. Subgroup analysis demonstrated a significant interaction between angiographic complexity (as assessed by the SYNTAX score) and angina relief (mean difference in the SAQ angina frequency score for CABG vs. PCI of -0.9, 3.3, and 3.9 points for low, intermediate, and high SYNTAX score patients, respectively; p = 0.048 for interaction)., Conclusions: Among patients with 3-vessel or left main CAD, both CABG and DES-PCI were associated with substantial and sustained quality-of-life benefits over 5 years of follow-up. In general, CABG resulted in greater angina relief, although the absolute treatment benefit was small. Angina relief at 5 years was enhanced with CABG among patients with high SYNTAX scores, a finding reinforcing the recommendation that CABG should be strongly preferred for such patients. (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery [SYNTAX]; NCT00114972)., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve (PARTNER) randomized controlled trial (RCT), which represented the first exposure to transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TA-TAVR) for many clinical sites, high-risk patients undergoing TA-TAVR derived similar health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes when compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). With increasing experience, it is possible that HRQoL outcomes of TA-TAVR may have improved., Methods and Results: We evaluated HRQoL outcomes at 1-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups among 875 patients undergoing TA-TAVR in the PARTNER nonrandomized continued access (NRCA) registry and compared these outcomes with those of the TA-TAVR and SAVR patients in the PARTNER RCT. HRQoL was assessed with the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ), the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 12, and the EuroQoL-5D, with the KCCQ overall summary score serving as the primary end point. The NRCA TA-TAVR and RCT TA-TAVR and SAVR groups were generally similar. The primary outcome, the KCCQ summary score, did not differ between the NRCA TA-TAVR and the RCT TA-TAVR group at any follow-up timepoints, although there were small differences in favor of the NRCA cohort on several KCCQ subscales at 1 month. There were no significant differences in follow-up HRQOL between the NRCA-TAVR and the RCT SAVR cohorts on the KCCQ overall summary scale or any of the disease-specific or generic subscales., Conclusions: Despite greater experience with TA-TAVR in the NRCA registry, HRQoL outcomes remained similar to those of TA-TAVR in the original RCT cohort and no better than those with SAVR. These findings have important implications for patient selection for TAVR when transfemoral access is not an option., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00530894., (© 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Objective: Cranial nerve injury (CNI) is the most common neurologic complication of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and can cause significant chronic disability. Data from prior randomized trials are limited and provide no health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes specific to CNI. Incidence of CNIs and their outcomes for patients in the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy vs Stenting Trial (CREST) were examined to identify factors predictive of CNI and their impact on HRQOL., Methods: Incidence of CNIs, baseline and procedural characteristics, outcomes, and HRQOL scores were evaluated in the 1151 patients randomized to CEA and undergoing surgery ≤30 days. Patients with CNI were identified and classified using case report forms, adverse event data, and clinical notes. Baseline and procedural characteristics were compared using descriptive statistics. Clinical outcomes at 1 and 12 months were analyzed. All data were adjudicated by two neurologists and a vascular surgeon. HRQOL was evaluated using the Medical Outcomes Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey to assess general health and Likert scales for disease-specific outcomes at 2 weeks, 4 weeks, and 12 months after CEA. The effect of CNI on SF-36 subscales was evaluated using random effects growth curve models, and Likert scale data were compared by ordinal logistic regression., Results: CNI was identified in 53 patients (4.6%). Cranial nerves injured were VII (30.2%), XII (24.5%), and IX/X (41.5%), and 3.8% had Horner syndrome. CNI occurred in 52 of 1040 patients (5.0%) receiving general anesthesia and in one of 111 patients (0.9%) operated on under local anesthesia (P = .05). No other predictive baseline or procedural factors were identified. Deficits resolved in 18 patients (34%) at 1 month and in 42 of 52 patients (80.8%) by 1 year. One patient died before the 1-year follow-up visit. The HRQOL evaluation showed no statistical difference between groups with and without CNI at any interval. By Likert scale analysis, the group with CNI showed a significant difference in the difficulty eating/swallowing parameter at 2 and 4 weeks (P < .001) but not at 1 year., Conclusions: In CREST, CNI occurred in 4.6% of patients undergoing CEA, with 34% resolution at 30 days and 80.8% at 1 year. The incidence of CNI was significantly higher in patients undergoing general anesthesia. CNI had a small and transient effect on HRQOL, negatively affecting only difficulty eating/swallowing at 2 and 4 weeks but not at 1 year. On the basis of these findings, we conclude that CNI is not a trivial consequence of CEA but rarely results in significant long-term disability., (Copyright © 2015 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: The FREEDOM trial demonstrated that among patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease, coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery resulted in lower rates of death and myocardial infarction but a higher risk of stroke when compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using drug-eluting stents. Whether there are treatment differences in health status, as assessed from the patient's perspective, is unknown., Objectives: To compare the relative effects of CABG vs PCI using drug-eluting stents on health status among patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease., Design, Setting, and Participants: Between 2005 and 2010, 1900 patients from 18 countries with diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease were randomized to undergo either CABG surgery (n = 947) or PCI (n = 953) as an initial treatment strategy. Of these, a total of 1880 patients had baseline health status assessed (935 CABG, 945 PCI) and comprised the primary analytic sample., Interventions: Initial revascularization with CABG surgery or PCI., Main Outcomes and Measures: Health status was assessed using the angina frequency, physical limitations, and quality-of-life domains of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire at baseline, at 1, 6, and 12 months, and annually thereafter. For each scale, scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores representing better health. The effect of CABG surgery vs PCI was evaluated using longitudinal mixed-effect models., Results: At baseline, mean (SD) scores for the angina frequency, physical limitations, and quality-of-life subscales of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire were 70.9 (25.1), 67.3 (24.4), and 47.8 (25.0) for the CABG group and 71.4 (24.7), 69.9 (23.2), and 49.2 (25.7) for the PCI group, respectively. At 2-year follow-up, mean (SD) scores were 96.0 (11.9), 87.8 (18.7), and 82.2 (18.9) after CABG and 94.7 (14.3), 86.0 (19.3), and 80.4 (19.6) after PCI, with significantly greater benefit of CABG on each domain (mean treatment benefit, 1.3 [95% CI, 0.3-2.2], 4.4 [95% CI, 2.7-6.1], and 2.2 [95% CI, 0.7-3.8] points, respectively; P < .01 for each comparison). Beyond 2 years, the 2 revascularization strategies provided generally similar patient-reported outcomes., Conclusions and Relevance: For patients with diabetes and multivessel CAD, CABG surgery provided slightly better intermediate-term health status and quality of life than PCI using drug-eluting stents. The magnitude of benefit was small, without consistent differences beyond 2 years, in part due to the higher rate of repeat revascularization with PCI., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00086450.

Objectives: This study sought to compare health status and quality-of-life outcomes for patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and high surgical risk treated with either transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR)., Background: For high-risk patients with severe AS, TAVR has been shown to result in similar 12-month survival but differing adverse events compared with AVR., Methods: We evaluated the health status of 628 patients with severe, symptomatic AS at high risk of surgical complications who were randomized to either TAVR or AVR in the PARTNER Trial. Health status was assessed at baseline and 1, 6, and 12 months using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, the Short Form-12, and the EuroQol-5D., Results: The primary outcome, the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire summary score, improved more rapidly with TAVR, but was similar for the 2 groups at 6 and 12 months. However, there was a significant interaction between the benefit of TAVR and access site (transapical vs. transfemoral). Patients eligible for transfemoral TAVR demonstrated significant health status benefits with TAVR versus AVR at 1 month (difference, 9.9 points; 95% confidence interval: 4.9 to 14.9; p < 0.001), whereas patients treated via the TA approach demonstrated no benefits with TAVR compared with AVR at any time point. Results for Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire subscales and generic measures demonstrated similar patterns., Conclusions: In high-risk patients with severe AS, health status improved substantially between baseline and 1 year after either TAVR or AVR. TAVR via the transfemoral, but not the transapical route, was associated with a short-term advantage compared with surgery. (Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve [PARTNER] trial; NCT00530894)., (Copyright © 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes in patients treated with carotid artery stenting (CAS) versus carotid endarterectomy (CEA)., Background: In CREST (Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial), the largest randomized trial of carotid revascularization to date, there was no significant difference in the primary composite endpoint, but rates of stroke and myocardial infarction (MI) differed between CAS and CEA. To help guide individualized clinical decision making, we compared HRQOL among patients enrolled in the CREST study. We also performed exploratory analyses to evaluate the association between periprocedural complications and HRQOL., Methods: We measured HRQOL at baseline, and after 2 weeks, 1 month, and 1 year among 2,502 patients randomly assigned to either CAS or CEA in the CREST study. The HRQOL was assessed using the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36 (SF-36) and 6 disease-specific scales designed to study HRQOL in patients undergoing carotid revascularization., Results: At both 2 weeks and 1 month, CAS patients had better outcomes for multiple components of the SF-36, with large differences for role physical function, pain, and the physical component summary scale (all p < 0.01). On the disease-specific scales, CAS patients reported less difficulty with driving, eating/swallowing, neck pain, and headaches but more difficulty with walking and leg pain (all p < 0.05). However, by 1 year, there were no differences in any HRQOL measure between CAS and CEA. In the exploratory analyses, periprocedural stroke was associated with poorer 1-year HRQOL across all SF-36 domains, but periprocedural MI or cranial nerve palsy were not., Conclusions: Among patients undergoing carotid revascularization, CAS is associated with better HRQOL during the early recovery period as compared with CEA-particularly with regard to physical limitations and pain-but these differences diminish over time and are not evident after 1 year. Although CAS and CEA are associated with similar overall HRQOL at 1 year, event-specific analyses confirm that stroke has a greater and more sustained impact on HRQOL than MI. (Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial [CREST]; NCT00004732), (Copyright © 2011 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Previous studies have shown that among patients undergoing multivessel revascularization, coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG), as compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) either by means of balloon angioplasty or with the use of bare-metal stents, results in greater relief from angina and improved quality of life. The effect of PCI with the use of drug-eluting stents on these outcomes is unknown., Methods: In a large, randomized trial, we assigned 1800 patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease to undergo either CABG (897 patients) or PCI with paclitaxel-eluting stents (903 patients). Health-related quality of life was assessed at baseline and at 1, 6, and 12 months with the use of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) and the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). The primary end point was the score on the angina-frequency subscale of the SAQ (on which scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status)., Results: The scores on each of the SAQ and SF-36 subscales were significantly higher at 6 and 12 months than at baseline in both groups. The score on the angina-frequency subscale of the SAQ increased to a greater extent with CABG than with PCI at both 6 and 12 months (P=0.04 and P=0.03, respectively), but the between-group differences were small (mean treatment effect of 1.7 points at both time points). The proportion of patients who were free from angina was similar in the two groups at 1 month and 6 months and was higher in the CABG group than in the PCI group at 12 months (76.3% vs. 71.6%, P=0.05). Scores on all the other SAQ and SF-36 subscales were either higher in the PCI group (mainly at 1 month) or were similar in the two groups throughout the follow-up period., Conclusions: Among patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease, there was greater relief from angina after CABG than after PCI at 6 and 12 months, although the extent of the benefit was small. (Funded by Boston Scientific; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00114972.).

Background: Ranolazine has been shown to reduce myocardial ischemia and symptom severity among selected patients with chronic angina. However, data regarding the effect of ranolazine on health status/quality of life (QOL) are limited., Methods and Results: We performed a prospective QOL analysis alongside the Metabolic Efficiency with Ranolazine for Less Ischemia in Non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (MERLIN)-TIMI 36 trial, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of ranolazine in 6560 patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes. Health status/QOL was evaluated at baseline and 4, 8, and 12 months after index hospitalization using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire, Rose dyspnea scale, SF-12, and EuroQol-5D. Health status/QOL scores improved significantly at all follow-up time points for both treatment arms. In the overall population, randomization to ranolazine was associated with minimal 12-month improvements in angina frequency and Seattle Angina Questionnaire-QOL (P<0.05). In subsequent exploratory analyses, there was a significant interaction between the benefits of ranolazine and anginal status before the index event. Among patients with prior angina (n=3565), treatment with ranolazine was associated with modest benefits across the full range of QOL domains, with the greatest benefits observed in angina frequency (mean effect=3.4; P<0.001) and Seattle Angina Questionnaire-QOL (mean effect=2.7; P<0.001). There were no significant benefits among patients without prior angina, however., Conclusions: Among a broad population of patients with unstable coronary disease, ranolazine had a minimal effect on disease-specific health status and QOL over approximately 12 months of follow-up. Posthoc subgroup analysis, however, suggested a modest benefit among the subgroup of patients with angina before their acute coronary syndromes event.

IntroductionEvaluation of health status benefits, cost-effectiveness, and value of new heart failure therapies is critical for supporting their use. The Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) measures patients' heart failure-specific health status but does not provide utilities needed for cost-effectiveness analyses. We mapped the KCCQ scores to EQ-5D scores so that estimates of societal-based utilities can be generated to support economic analyses.MethodsUsing data from two US cohort studies, we developed models for predicting EQ-5D utilities (3L and 5L versions) from the KCCQ (23- and 12-item versions). In addition to predicting scores directly, we considered predicting the five EQ-5D health state items and deriving utilities from the predicted responses, allowing different countries' health state valuations to be used. Model validation was performed internally via bootstrap and externally using data from two clinical trials. Model performance was assessed using R2, mean prediction error, mean absolute prediction error, and calibration of observed vs. predicted values.ResultsThe EQ-5D-3L models were developed from 1000 health status assessments in 547 patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), while the EQ-5D-5L model was developed from 3925 patients with HFrEF. For both versions, models predicting individual EQ-5D items performed as well as those predicting utilities directly. The selected models for the 3L had internally validated R2 of 48.4-50.5% and 33.7-45.6% on external validation. The 5L version had validated R2 of 57.7%.ConclusionMappings from the KCCQ to the EQ-5D can yield the estimates of societal-based utilities to support cost-effectiveness analyses when EQ-5D data are not available.

Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate whether transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the SAPIEN 3 valve (S3-TAVR) results in improved quality of life (QoL) compared with previous-generation TAVR devices or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Background In patients with severe aortic stenosis at intermediate surgical risk, TAVR using the SAPIEN XT valve (XT-TAVR) results in similar QoL compared with SAVR. Compared with SAPIEN XT, the SAPIEN 3 valve offers a lower delivery profile and modifications to reduce paravalvular regurgitation. Methods Between February and December 2014, 1,078 patients at intermediate surgical risk with severe aortic stenosis were treated with S3-TAVR in the PARTNER S3i (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) trial. QoL was assessed at baseline, 1 month, and 1 year using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36, and EQ-5D. QoL outcomes of S3-TAVR patients were compared with those in the SAVR and XT-TAVR arms of the PARTNER 2A trial using propensity score stratification to adjust for differences between the treatment groups. Results Over 1 year, S3-TAVR was associated with substantial improvements in QoL compared with baseline. At 1 month, S3-TAVR was associated with better QoL than either SAVR or XT-TAVR (adjusted differences in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score 15.6 and 3.7 points, respectively; p < 0.001). At 1 year, the differences in QoL between S3-TAVR and both SAVR and XT-TAVR were reduced but remained statistically significant (adjusted differences 2.0 and 2.2 points, respectively; p < 0.05). Similar results were seen for generic QoL outcomes. Conclusions Among patients at intermediate surgical risk with severe aortic stenosis, S3-TAVR resulted in improved QoL at both 1 month and 1 year compared with both XT-TAVR and SAVR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Recent cost-effectiveness analyses of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) have been limited by a short time horizon or were restricted to the US healthcare perspective. We, therefore, used individual patient-level data from the SYNTAX trial to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PCI versus CABG from a European (Dutch) perspective.Methods and Results: Between 2005 and 2007, 1800 patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease were randomised to either CABG (n=897) or PCI with drug-eluting stents (DES; n=903). Costs were estimated for all patients based on observed healthcare resource usage over 5 years of follow-up. Health state utilities were evaluated with the EuroQOL questionnaire. A patient-level microsimulation model based on Dutch life-tables was used to extrapolate the 5-year in-trial data to a lifetime horizon. Although initial procedural costs were lower for CABG, total initial hospitalisation costs per patient were higher (€17 506 vs €14 037, p<0.001). PCI was more costly during the next 5 years of follow-up, due to more frequent hospitalisations, repeat revascularisation procedures and higher medication costs. Nevertheless, total 5-year costs remained €2465/patient higher with CABG. When the in-trial results were extrapolated to a lifetime horizon, CABG was projected to be economically attractive relative to DES-PCI, with gains in both life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) (€5390/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained) was favourable and remained <€80 000/QALY in >90% of the bootstrap replicates. Outcomes were similar when incorporating the prognostic impact of non-fatal myocardial infarction and stroke, as well as across a broad range of assumptions regarding the effect of CABG on post-trial survival and costs. However, DES-PCI was economically dominant compared with CABG in patients with a SYNTAX Score ≤22 or in those with left main disease. In patients for whom the SYNTAX Score II favoured PCI based on lower predicted 4-year mortality, PCI was also economically dominant, whereas in those patients for whom the SYNTAX Score II favoured surgery, CABG was highly economically attractive (ICER range, €2967 to €3737/QALY gained).Conclusions: For the broad population with three-vessel or left main disease who are candidates for either CABG or PCI, we found that CABG is a clinically and economically attractive revascularisation strategy compared with DES-PCI from a Dutch healthcare perspective. The cost-effectiveness of CABG versus PCI differed according to several anatomic factors, however. The newly developed SYNTAX Score II provides enhanced prognostic discrimination in this population, and may be a useful tool to guide resource allocation as well.Trial Registration Number: Clinical trial unique identifier: NCT00114972 (http://www.clinical-trials.gov). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis at low surgical risk, transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the SAPIEN 3 valve has been shown to reduce the composite of death, stroke, or rehospitalization at 2-year follow-up compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Whether TAVR is cost-effective compared with SAVR for low-risk patients remains uncertain. Methods: Between 2016 and 2017, 1000 low-risk patients with aortic stenosis were randomly assigned to TAVR with the SAPIEN 3 valve or SAVR in the PARTNER 3 trial (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves). Of these patients, 929 underwent valve replacement, were enrolled in the United States, and were included in the economic substudy. Procedural costs were estimated using measured resource use. Other costs were determined by linkage with Medicare claims or by regression models when linkage was not feasible. Health utilities were estimated using the EuroQOL 5-item questionnaire. With the use of a Markov model informed by in-trial data, lifetime cost-effectiveness from the perspective of the US health care system was estimated in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Results: Although procedural costs were nearly $19 000 higher with TAVR, total index hospitalization costs were only $591 more with TAVR compared with SAVR. Follow-up costs were lower with TAVR such that TAVR led to 2-year cost savings of $2030/patient compared with SAVR (95% CI, –$6222 to $1816) and a gain of 0.05 quality-adjusted life-years (95% CI, –0.003 to 0.102). In our base-case analysis, TAVR was projected to be an economically dominant strategy with a 95% probability that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for TAVR would be <$50 000/quality-adjusted life-year gained (consistent with high economic value from a US health care perspective). These findings were sensitive to differences in long-term survival, however, such that a modest long-term survival advantage with SAVR would render SAVR cost-effective (although not cost saving) compared with TAVR. Conclusions: For patients with severe aortic stenosis and low surgical risk similar to those enrolled in the PARTNER 3 trial, transfemoral TAVR with the SAPIEN 3 valve is cost saving compared with SAVR at 2 years and is projected to be economically attractive in the long run as long as there are no substantial differences in late death between the 2 strategies. Long-term follow-up will be critical to ultimately determine the preferred treatment strategy for low-risk patients from both a clinical and economic perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study which analyzes the relationship between initial treatment, repeat revascularization during follow-up, and angina at one year using the Synergy between percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) trial population, design and end points. It mentions that the SYNTAX trial involved patients with multivessel coronary disease who were randomized to coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) or PCI with paclitaxel-eluting stents.

Background: Previous studies of the cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have been based primarily on a single balloon-expandable system.Objectives: The goal of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TAVR with a self-expanding prosthesis compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for patients with severe aortic stenosis and high surgical risk.Methods: We performed a formal economic analysis on the basis of individual, patient-level data from the CoreValve U.S. High Risk Pivotal Trial. Empirical data regarding survival and quality of life over 2 years, and medical resource use and hospital costs through 12 months were used to project life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy, and lifetime medical costs in order to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of TAVR versus SAVR from a U.S.Results: Relative to SAVR, TAVR reduced initial length of stay an average of 4.4 days, decreased the need for rehabilitation services at discharge, and resulted in superior 1-month quality of life. Index admission and projected lifetime costs were higher with TAVR than with SAVR (differences $11,260 and $17,849 per patient, respectively), whereas TAVR was projected to provide a lifetime gain of 0.32 quality-adjusted life-years ([QALY]; 0.41 LY) with 3% discounting. Lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were $55,090 per QALY gained and $43,114 per LY gained. Sensitivity analyses indicated that a reduction in the initial cost of TAVR by ∼$1,650 would lead to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <$50,000/QALY gained.Conclusions: In a high-risk clinical trial population, TAVR with a self-expanding prosthesis provided meaningful clinical benefits compared with SAVR, with incremental costs considered acceptable by current U.S.Standards: With expected modest reductions in the cost of index TAVR admissions, the value of TAVR compared with SAVR in this patient population would become high. (Safety and Efficacy Study of the Medtronic CoreValve System in the Treatment of Symptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis in High Risk and Very High Risk Subjects Who Need Aortic Valve Replacement [Medtronic CoreValve U.S. Pivotal Trial]; NCT01240902). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) for patients with severe aortic stenosis and high surgical risk. Background: TAVR is an alternative to AVR for patients with severe aortic stenosis and high surgical risk. Methods: We performed a formal economic analysis based on cost, quality of life, and survival data collected in the PARTNER A (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) trial in which patients with severe aortic stenosis and high surgical risk were randomized to TAVR or AVR. Cumulative 12-month costs (assessed from a U.S. societal perspective) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were compared separately for the transfemoral (TF) and transapical (TA) cohorts. Results: Although 12-month costs and QALYs were similar for TAVR and AVR in the overall population, there were important differences when results were stratified by access site. In the TF cohort, total 12-month costs were slightly lower with TAVR and QALYs were slightly higher such that TF-TAVR was economically dominant compared with AVR in the base case and economically attractive (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <$50,000/QALY) in 70.9% of bootstrap replicates. In the TA cohort, 12-month costs remained substantially higher with TAVR, whereas QALYs tended to be lower such that TA-TAVR was economically dominated by AVR in the base case and economically attractive in only 7.1% of replicates. Conclusions: In the PARTNER trial, TAVR was an economically attractive strategy compared with AVR for patients suitable for TF access. Future studies are necessary to determine whether improved experience and outcomes with TA-TAVR can improve its cost-effectiveness relative to AVR. (THE PARTNER TRIAL: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve Trial; NCT00530894) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]