Table 4.
Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (in euros per QALYs gained)a
| CRT-P versus OPT | CRT-D versus OPT | CRT-D versus CRT-P | CRT-D versus ICD | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fox et al. [11] | €20,077 | €28,372 | €48,179 | – |
| Yao et al. [12] | €6763 | €16,166 | €42,986 | – |
| Aidelsburger et al. [13] | – | €76,350 | – | – |
| Bond et al. [14] | €19,865 | – | €47,662 | – |
| Callejo et al. [15] | €30,307 | – | €56,719 | – |
| Bertoldi et al. [16] | €11,808 | – | €63,343 | €32,664 |
| Neyt et al. [17] | €9849 | – | €49,774 | – |
| Colquitt et al. [18] | €29,551b | €29,889a | €30,447a | €29,135b |
aIndexed for purchasing power parities for GDP [26] and in 2014 prices
bCorresponds to population II in Colquitt et al. [18], i.e., patients with heart failure as a result of LVSD and cardiac dyssynchrony despite receiving OPT; Corresponds to population III in Colquitt et al. [18] i.e., group II plus patients at risk of SDC due to ventricular arrhythmias despite receiving OPT)