| Health Technology Assessment 1998; Vol. 2: No. 10 (Executive
summary)
Executive summary
View/Download full
monograph in Adobe Acrobat format (627 kbytes)
View/Download this
4-page summary in Adobe Acrobat format (suitable for printing)
Resource allocation for chronic stable angina: a systematic review of effectiveness,
costs and cost-effectiveness of alternative interventions
MJ Sculpher
M Petticrew
JL Kelland
RA Elliott
DR Holdright
MJ Buxton
Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UK
Objectives
To update earlier reviews of the effectiveness of treatment for chronic stable angina
and to include
- assessment of medical therapy and of newer adjunctive technologies such as coronary
stents
- broader assessment of patient benefits
- consideration of cost and cost-effectiveness
Methods
Full details of the search strategy are presented in the full report.
Results
In all, 197 papers were reviewed in full - 148 relating to clinical effectiveness, 24
to health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and 25 to cost and cost-effectiveness.
Medical treatment
- Few studies exist of long-term effectiveness, with little evidence of large differences
between different classes of drug.
- There is little evidence on patients' quality of life.
- No UK cost or cost-effectiveness studies were identified.
CABG versus medical therapy
- Coronary artery bypass grafts (CABG) have mortality benefits for up to 5 years and
possibly longer (up to 10 years) compared with medical therapy, particularly in patients
with greater extent of disease.
- One study showed that initial benefits to patients from CABG, in terms of extent of
angina and activity limitation, have disappeared by 10 years.
- Available economic data reflect the results of effectiveness studies; CABG is most
cost-effective where there is greatest incremental benefit - in patients with severe
angina, left main disease and multi-vessel disease.
PTCA versus medical therapy
- Some evidence supports percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) in terms of
relief of angina but evidence on myocardial infarction (MI) rates is conflicting.
- Clinical benefit is apparently reflected in improved HRQoL, although information on
long-term effects of revascularisation is lacking.
PTCA versus CABG
- No differences emerged between PTCA and CABG in terms of mortality and non-fatal MI.
- CABG is likely to be associated with fewer additional procedures than PTCA in the first
year post-surgery and appears to be more effective in relief of angina.
- CABG improves survival compared with PTCA in patients with severe disease.
- No differences were found between CABG and PTCA in terms of HRQoL largely due to
methodological problems. Indirect assessment of HRQoL (via reductions in angina rates)
shows a benefit for CABG over PTCA.
- The relative cost of procedures depends on point of follow-up. The most recent UK cost
analysis showed an initial mean cost for PTCA of 52% that for CABG, increasing to 81% at 2
years.
- No recent cost-effectiveness analyses were identified, and none relating to UK practice.
Non-comparative studies of CABG
- CABG relieves angina in most patients undergoing surgery.
- Interior mammary artery (IMA) grafts appear to be associated with greater long-term
patency and less angina at long-term follow-up than non-IMA grafts.
- Many outcomes appear to be slightly worse in women than men, and in older patients.
- There is a clear association between short- and longer-term mortality and disease
severity (number of vessels diseased), ejection fraction and initial severity of angina.
- HRQoL improves after CABG; physical, sexual and social functioning improve significantly
in most patients.
Medical adjuncts to CABG
- Aspirin (with or without dipyridamole) appears to reduce occlusion following CABG.
- No evidence was identified on HRQoL or cost-effectiveness.
Non-comparative studies of PTCA
- There is some evidence of gender differences in long-term outcomes.
- Success of PTCA is influenced by age of patient and angina class.
- PTCA can be effective in patients with left ventricular disease.
- HRQoL improves after PTCA but no information is available on key subgroups.
Non-medical adjuncts to PTCA
- Results of on-going trials with longer follow-up periods are awaited before conclusions
can be drawn on effectiveness of elective stenting. At present, evidence is very limited;
few studies support the current opinion of cardiologists that stents are effective.
- Aspirin therapy as an adjunct to stenting results in a lower risk of MI, fewer repeat
interventions and less occlusion of the stented vessel.
- There is no evidence that laser angioplasty or atherectomy add any benefit to
conventional PTCA.
- Cost studies undertaken in the USA showed that adjunctive technologies cost more than
PTCA overall. Their cost-effectiveness is doubtful.
Medical adjuncts to PTCA
- Few trials detected any important benefits from the addition of drugs to PTCA.
- Some evidence supports the use of aspirin, in terms of reduced long-term MI and
restenosis rates.
- There is some evidence that calcium antagonists are useful in reducing restenosis after
coronary angioplasty.
- Patients benefited from a lower rate of in-hospital MI, CABG and repeat PTCA after a new
glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor monoclonal antibody. However, the benefits came at the cost
of an increased bleeding rate which may have been a function of the relatively high level
of heparin administration. A cost analysis showed a 6-month difference in costs between
the new drug and placebo of $293 per patient.
- The platelet-derived growth factor antagonist trapidil has been shown to be more
effective than aspirin in reducing restenosis after PTCA.
- Good quality meta-analyses showed the effectiveness of antiplatelet agents in reducing
risk of MI and stroke in post-PTCA patients.
- One meta-analysis showed that supplemental fish oils reduce restenosis.
Conclusions
Policy implications
- Healthcare purchasers and providers should consider local information, such as local
epidemiological data, cost structures and available patterns of care.
- The relative benefit of alternative forms of clinical management involves values or
preference weightings being placed on a range of outcomes generated by an intervention.
Decision-makers could consider local information on public or patients' values.
- For purchasers the evidence could imply that blanket decisions to provide only one form
of intervention to patients should not be made. The various main forms of treatment for
stable angina should be available and patients should be informed of the therapeutic
options rather than offered a single therapy based on provider preferences.
- The provision of local evidence-based guidance to general practitioners on smoking
cessation may also help improve outcomes in smokers undergoing CABG or PTCA.
- Local decisions about resource allocation should be informed by the use of decision
analysis as a framework to handle the multiple factors that need to be considered.
- Formal evaluation of new technologies should be considered before they become widely
diffused.
Research recommendations
- Adequately-powered, long-term studies are needed of costs and effects of rational
combinations of medical treatments.
- Cost and cost-effectiveness of PTCA should be compared with medical therapy.
- Relative cost-effectiveness of the new generation medical and non-medical adjuncts to
PTCA and CABG, including stents, requires assessment.
- Relative cost-effectiveness of new interventions such as transmyocardial
revascularisation and minimally invasive bypass grafting needs assessment.
- In stable angina, studies of patients' treatment- and health-related preferences are
required.
- More economic evaluation of alternative treatments for stable angina is needed; it
should cover a wider selection of technologies and reach higher methodological standards
than those already published.
Publication
Sculpher MJ, Petticrew M, Kelland JL, Elliott RA, Holdright DR, Buxton MJ.
Resource allocation for chronic stable angina: a systematic review of the effectiveness,
costs and cost-effectiveness of alternative interventions. Health Technol Assessment
1998; 2(10).
NHS R&D HTA Programme
The overall aim of the NHS R&D Health Technology Assessment (HTA)
programme is to ensure that high quality research information on the costs, effectiveness
and broader impact of health technologies is produced in the most efficient way for those
who use, manage and work in the NHS. Research is undertaken in those areas where the
evidence will lead to the greatest benefits to patients, either through improved patient
outcomes or the most efficient use of NHS resources.
The Standing Group on Health Technology advises on national priorities
for health technology assessment. Six advisory panels assist the Standing Group in
identifying and prioritising projects. These priorities are then considered by the HTA
Commissioning Board supported by the National Coordinating Centre for HTA.
This report is one of a series covering acute care, diagnostics and
imaging, methodology, pharmaceuticals, population screening, and primary and community
care. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily
those of the Standing Group, the Commissioning Board or the Panel members.
Series Editors:
Andrew Stevens, Ruairidh Milne, Ken Stein
Assistant Editor:
Jane Robertson, Jane Royle
©1998 Crown Copyright |