Cost‐effectiveness of remote haemodynamic monitoring by an implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitoring sensor (CardioMEMS‐HF system) in chronic heart failure in the Netherlands

Abstract

AimsRemote haemodynamic monitoring with an implantable pulmonary artery (PA) sensor has been shown to reduce heart failure (HF) hospitalizations and improve quality of life. Cost‐effectiveness analyses studying the value of remote haemodynamic monitoring in a European healthcare system with a contemporary standard care group are lacking.Methods and resultsA Markov model was developed to estimate the cost‐effectiveness of PA‐guided therapy compared to the standard of care based upon patient‐level data of the MONITOR‐HF trial performed in the Netherlands in patients with chronic HF (New York Heart Association class III and at least one previous HF hospitalization). Cost‐effectiveness was measured as the incremental cost per quality‐adjusted life year (QALY) gained from the Dutch societal perspective with a lifetime horizon which encompasses a wide variety of costs including costs of hospitalizations, monitoring time, telephone contacts, laboratory assessments, and drug changes in both treatment groups. In the base‐case analysis, PA‐guided therapy increased costs compared to standard of care by €12 121. The QALYs per patient for PA‐guided therapy and standard of care was 4.07 and 3.481, respectively, reflecting a gain of 0.58 QALYs. The resulting incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio was €20 753 per QALY, which is below the Dutch willingness‐to‐pay threshold of €50 000 per QALY gained for HF.ConclusionsThe current cost‐effectiveness study suggests that remote haemodynamic monitoring with PA‐guided therapy on top of standard care is likely to be cost‐effective for patients with symptomatic moderate‐to‐severe HF in the Netherlands.