Comparison of Cost-Effectiveness of Oral Rapamycin Plus Bare-Metal Stents Versus First Generation of Drug-Eluting Stents (from the Randomized Oral Rapamycin in Argentina [ORAR] 3 Trial)

AE Rodriguez, I Palacios, AM Rodriguez-Granillo, JR Mieres, S Tarragona, C Fernandez-Pereira, L Solorzano, R Pauletto, PWJC (Patrick) Serruys, D Antoniucci

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare 5-year cost-effectiveness and clinical outcomes of patients with oral rapamycin (OR) plus bare-metal stent versus the drug-eluting stent (DES) strategy. During 2006 to 2007, a total of 200 patients were randomized to OR (n = 100) and DES (n = 100). Primary end point was to compare costs of initial procedure and cost-effectiveness of both revascularization strategies. Safety was evaluated by the composite of death, myocardial infarction, and cerebrovascular accident. Efficacy was assessed by target vessel and target lesion revascularizations. The 2 groups had similar baseline demographic, clinical, and angiographic characteristics. In the DES group, paclitaxel-, zotarolimus-, and sirolimus-eluting stents were used. Five-year clinical follow-up was accomplished in 99% patients. The DES group had significantly higher procedural (p <0.001), discharge to first-year (p = 0.02), and 1- to 5-year costs (p <0.001) compared with the OR group. At 5 years, the composite end point of death, myocardial infarction, and cerebrovascular accident (12% in the OR group vs 25% in the DES group, p = 0.01) was significantly less in the OR group. Target vessel revascularization (14.5% in the OR group vs 21% in the DES group, p = 0.16) and target lesion revascularization (10% in the OR group vs 17.6% in the DES group, p = 0.05) were not significantly different. In conclusion, a strategy of OR plus bare-metal stent was cost saving than a first-generation DES. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Original languageUndefined/Unknown
Pages (from-to)815-821
Number of pages7
JournalAmerican Journal of Cardiology
Volume113
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Cite this