Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

What is the cost of non-response to cardiac resynchronization therapy? Hospitalizations and healthcare utilization in the CRT-D population

  • Published:
Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an effective treatment for heart failure (HF) with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and prolonged QRS interval. However, one third of patients do not benefit from treatment. This study compares the heart failure hospitalization (HFH) rates and corresponding costs between responders and non-responders to CRT.

Methods

At a single center in New Jersey, we enrolled patients with de novo CRT-D implants between January 2011 and July 2013. Medical history at implant and all subsequent hospitalizations were collected. A retrospective chart review of the cardiology visit at or closest to 12 months post-CRT implant was performed, and patients were classified into responders and non-responders. Universal billing records (UB-04), ICD-9-CM diagnoses, and procedure codes were used to determine whether each hospitalization was due to HF. For each heart failure hospitalization (HFH), an MS-DRG-based US national average Medicare reimbursement was determined. HFH rates and associated payor costs were compared between responders and non-responders using negative binomial regression and non-parametric bootstrapping (×10,000), respectively.

Results

CRT response was determined in 135 patients (n = 103 responders, n = 32 non-responders, average follow-up 1.4 years). Demographics, pre-implant HF characteristics, NYHA Class, QRS duration, ejection fraction (EF), left bundle branch block (LBBB) status, and co-morbidities were not statistically different between the two groups. The HFH rate was significantly lower in responders (0.43/patient year) compared to non-responders (0.96/patient year, IRR = 0.45, 95 % CI (0.23 0.90), P = 0.0197). Average US national Medicare reimbursement for the responder group (US$7205/patient year) was 48 % lower than that for the non-responder group (US$13,861/patient year, P = 0.035).

Conclusion

In this single-center retrospective study, responders to CRT had significantly lower rates of post-implant heart failure hospitalization rate and reduced associated payor costs compared to non-responders. Therapies that increase CRT response rates can substantially reduce healthcare utilization.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Massie BM, Shah NB. Evolving trends in the epidemiologic factors of heart failure: rationale for preventive strategies and comprehensive disease management. Am Heart J. 1997;133:703–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Heidenreich PA, Albert NM, Allen LA, Bluemke DA, Butler J, Fonarow GC, et al. Forecasting the impact of heart failure in the United States: a policy statement from the American Heart Association. Circ Heart Fail. 2013;6(3):606–19.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Mozaffarian D, Benjamin EJ, Go AS, et al. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2016 Update A Report From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2015;133:e38–e360.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Luis ER, Eduardo GB, Livia G, Carísi AP. Cost-effectiveness of heart failure therapies. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2013;10:338–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Giamouzis G, Kalogeropoulos A, Georgiopoulou V, Laskar S, Smith AL, Dunbar S, et al. Hospitalization epidemic Event Rate Difference (HFHrateCRT-NR - HFHrateCRT-R) in patients with heart failure: risk factors, risk prediction, knowledge gaps, and future directions. J Card Fail. 2011;17(1):54–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dharmarajan K et al. Diagnoses and Timing of 30-Day Readmissions After Hospitalization for Heart Failure, Acute Myocardial Infarction, or Pneumonia. JAMA. 2013;309:4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chung ES, Bartone C, Daly K, Menon S, McDonald M. The Relationship Among Heart Failure Disease Management, Quality of Care, and Hospitalizations. J Med Pract Manage. 2015;31(3):172–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hunt SA, Abraham WT, Chin MH, Feldman AM, Francis GS, Ganiats TG, et al. ACC/AHA 2005 guideline update for the diagnosis and management of chronic heart failure in the adult a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Update the 2001 Guidelines for the Evaluation and Management of Heart Failure): developed in collaboration with the American College of Chest Physicians and the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation: endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society. Circulation. 2005;112(12):e154–235.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Abraham WT et al. Cardiac Resynchronization in Chronic Heart Failure. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(24):1845–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Merchant FM et al. Impact of segmental left ventricle lead position on cardiac resynchronization therapy outcomes. Heart Rhythm. 2010;7(5):639–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Singh JP et al. Left Ventricular Lead Position and Clinical Outcome in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT-CRT) Trial. Circulation. 2011;123(11):1159–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Quan H, Sundararajan V, Halfon P, Fong A, Burnand B, Luthi JC, et al. Coding algorithms for defining comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data. Med Care. 2005;43:1130–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chin MH, Goldman L. Correlates of early hospital readmission or death in patients with congestive heart failure. Am J Cardiol. 1997;79(12):1640–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kremers MS, Hammill SC, Berul CI, Koutras C, Curtis JS, Wang Y, et al. The National ICD Registry Report: version 2.1 including leads and pediatrics for years 2010 and 2011. Heart Rhythm. 2013;10(4):e59–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Daubert JC, Saxon L, Adamson PB, Auricchio A, Berger RD, Beshai JF, et al. 2012 EHRA/HRS expert consensus statement on cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure: implant and follow-up recommendations and management. Europace. 2012;14(9):1236–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Anand IS, Carson P, Galle E, Song E, Boehmer J, Ghali JK, et al. Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Reduces the Risk of Hospitalizations in Patients With Advanced Heart Failure: Results From the Comparison of Medical Therapy, Pacing and Defibrillation in Heart Failure (COMPANION) Trial. Circulation. 2009;119:969–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gold MR, Padhiar A, Mealing S, Sidhu MK, Tsintzos SI, Abraham WT. Long-Term Extrapolation of Clinical Benefits Among Patients With Mild Heart Failure Receiving Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: Analysis of the 5-Year Follow-Up From the REVERSE Study. JACC Heart Fail. 2015;3(9):691–700.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gorcsan III J, Sogaard P, Bax JJ, Singh JP, Abraham WT, Borer JS, et al. Association of persistent or worsened echocardiographic dyssynchrony with unfavourable clinical outcomes in heart failure patients with narrow QRS width: a subgroup analysis of the EchoCRT trial. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:49–59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Dall TM, Blanchard TD, Gallo PD, Semilla AP. The economic impact of Medicare Part D on congestive heart failure. Am J Manag Care. 2013;19(6 Suppl):s97–100.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Pappone C, Calovic Z, Vicedomini G, Cuko A, McSpadden L, Ryu K, et al. Improving cardiac resynchronization therapy response with multipoint left ventricular pacing: 12 month follow-up study. Heart Rhythm. 2015;12:1250–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Pappone C, Calovic Z, Cuko A, McSpadden L, Ryu K, Jordan CD, et al. Multipoint left ventricular pacing provides additional echocardiographic benefit to responders and non-responders to conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy. Eu Heart Journal. 2015;17:A12–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Menardi E, Ballari GP, Goletto C, Rossetti G, Vado A. Characterization of Ventricular activation pattern and acute hemodynamics during multipoint left ventricular pacing. Heart Rhythm. 2015;12:1762–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Birnie D, Lemke B, Aonuma K, Krum H, Lee KLF, Gasparini M, et al. Clinical outcomes with synchronized left ventricular pacing: analysis of the adaptive CRT trial. Heart Rhythm. 2013;10(9):1368–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Johnson EK, Nelson CP. Utility and pitfalls in the use of administrative databases for outcomes assessment. J Urol. 2013;190(1):17.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Riddhi Shah, JoEllen Schmidt, and Lisa Cruser for their contribution to the study execution.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Deborah Heart and Lung Cente, Browns Mills, NJ, USA

    Raffaele Corbisiero, David C. Buck & Pedram Kazemian

  2. St. Jude Medical, Sylmar, CA, USA

    David Muller, Rupinder Bharmi & Nirav Dalal

Authors
  1. Raffaele Corbisiero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David C. Buck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Muller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rupinder Bharmi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Nirav Dalal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Pedram Kazemian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raffaele Corbisiero.

Ethics declarations

The local Institutional Review Board approved the study and all the participating individuals consented to participate in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Corbisiero, R., Buck, D.C., Muller, D. et al. What is the cost of non-response to cardiac resynchronization therapy? Hospitalizations and healthcare utilization in the CRT-D population. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 47, 189–195 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-016-0180-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-016-0180-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation