12 research outputs found
Reduced costs with bisoprolol treatment for heart failure - An economic analysis of the second Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study (CIBIS-II)
Background
Beta-blockers, used as an adjunctive to diuretics, digoxin and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, improve survival in chronic heart failure. We report a prospectively planned economic analysis of the cost of adjunctive beta-blocker therapy in the second Cardiac Insufficiency BIsoprolol Study (CIBIS II).
Methods
Resource utilization data (drug therapy, number of hospital admissions, length of hospital stay, ward type) were collected prospectively in all patients in CIBIS . These data were used to determine the additional direct costs incurred, and savings made, with bisoprolol therapy. As well as the cost of the drug, additional costs related to bisoprolol therapy were added to cover the supervision of treatment initiation and titration (four outpatient clinic/office visits). Per them (hospital bed day) costings were carried out for France, Germany and the U.K. Diagnosis related group costings were performed for France and the U.K. Our analyses took the perspective of a third party payer in France and Germany and the National Health Service in the U.K.
Results
Overall, fewer patients were hospitalized in the bisoprolol group, there were fewer hospital admissions perpatient hospitalized, fewer hospital admissions overall, fewer days spent in hospital and fewer days spent in the most expensive type of ward. As a consequence the cost of care in the bisoprolol group was 5-10% less in all three countries, in the per them analysis, even taking into account the cost of bisoprolol and the extra initiation/up-titration visits. The cost per patient treated in the placebo and bisoprolol groups was FF35 009 vs FF31 762 in France, DM11 563 vs DM10 784 in Germany and pound 4987 vs pound 4722 in the U.K. The diagnosis related group analysis gave similar results.
Interpretation
Not only did bisoprolol increase survival and reduce hospital admissions in CIBIS II, it also cut the cost of care in so doing. This `win-win' situation of positive health benefits associated with cost savings is Favourable from the point of view of both the patient and health care systems. These findings add further support for the use of beta-blockers in chronic heart failure
Clinical audit of pre- and postnatal diagnostics of obstructive congenital left heart defects at the perinatal center (level III)
Aim. To compare the data of pre- and postnatal expert echocardiographic diagnostics of obstructive left heart defects (LHD) to identify a possible predictors and reasons for hypo- and overdiagnosis of this.Material and methods. A retrospective analysis of data from expert echocardiography of 194 fetuses and newborns with suspected obstructive LHD (coarctation of the aorta (CA), interruption of the aortic arch, aortic stenosis (AS), CA or interruption of the aortic arch with AS, hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS)) was performed.Results. After birth, critical obstructive LHD was confirmed in 59,3% of newborns (115 out of 194): in cases of prenatally diagnosed CA — in 41% of children (42 out of 103); AS — in 67% (4 out of 6); CA with AS — in 65,9% (27 out of 41); HLHS — in 93,9% (39 out of 44); or interruption of the aortic arch with and without AS — in 100% (11 out of 11). After birth, the discrepancy in diagnoses of critical congenital heart defects was detected in 2 cases — obstructive LHD were not confirmed, but total anomalous pulmonary venous drainage (APVD) was detected. In children with a confirmed diagnosis of HLHS after birth, there was a hypodiagnosis of obstructive forms of APVD in three newborns.Conclusion. The probability of confirming a critical obstructive LHD after birth is higher, the more LHD were hypoplasized during intrauterine imaging. APVD may be “hemodynamically masked” as HLHS when prenatal echocardiography is performed. The combination of HLHS and obstructive forms of APVD can lead to HLHS “hemodynamic aggravation” due to an additional decrease in blood flow of left heart
Oxygen active form production and endothelial system status in coronary heart disease patients with reduced contractility function
2020 Clinical practice guidelines for Bradyarrhythmias and conduction disorders
Endorsed by: Research and Practical Council of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
2020 Clinical practice guidelines for Supraventricular tachycardia in adults
With the participation: All-Russian Scientific Society of Specialists in Clinical Electrophysiology, Arrhythmology and Pacing, Russian Association of Cardiovascular SurgeonsEndorsed by: Research and Practical Council of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federatio
Cellular aspects of pathogenesis of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: Role of cardiomyocyte polyploidy and activation of nuclear antigen of the proliferating cell in myocardium
Celebrations, Commemorative Dates and Related Rituals: Soviet Experience, its Transformation and Contemporary Victory Day Celebrations in Russia and Latvia
The Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study II (CIBIS-II): a randomised trial
Background In patients with heart failure, beta-blochade has improved morbidity and left-ventricular function, but the impact on survival is uncertain. We investigated the efficacy of bisoprolol, a beta(1) selective adrenoceptor blocker in decreasing all-cause mortality in chronic heart failure. Methods In a multicentre double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial in Europe, we enrolled 2647 symptomatic patients in New York Heart Association class III or IV, with left-ventricular ejection fraction of 35% or less receiving standard therapy with diuretics and inhibitors of angiotensin-converting enzyme. We randomly assigned patients bisoprolol 1.25 mg (n=1327) or placebo (n=1320) daily, the drug being progressively increased to a maximum of 10 mg per day. Patients were followed up for a mean of 1.3 years. Analysis was by intention to treat. Findings CIBIS-II was stopped early, after the second interim analysis, because bisoprolol showed a significant mortality benefit. All-cause mortality was significantly lower with bisoprolol than on placebo (156 [11.8%] vs 228 [17.3%] deaths with a hazard ratio of 0.66 (95% CI 0.54-0.81, p<0.0001). There were significantly fewer sudden deaths among patients on bisoprolol than in those on placebo (48 [3.6%] vs 83 [6.3%] deaths), with a hazard ratio of 0.56 (0.39-0.80, p=0.0011). Treatment effects were independent of the severity or cause of heart failure. Interpretation beta-blocker therapy had benefits for survival in stable heart-failure patients. Results should not, however, be extrapolated to patients with severe class IV symptoms and recent instability because safety and efficacy has not been established in these patients
The Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study II (CIBIS-II): a randomised trial
Background: In patients with heart failure, beta-blochade has improved morbidity and left-ventricular function, but the impact on survival is uncertain. We investigated the efficacy of bisoprolol, a beta(1) selective adrenoceptor blocker in decreasing all-cause mortality in chronic heart failure.
Methods: In a multicentre double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial in Europe, we enrolled 2647 symptomatic patients in New York Heart Association class III or IV, with left-ventricular ejection fraction of 35% or less receiving standard therapy with diuretics and inhibitors of angiotensin-converting enzyme. We randomly assigned patients bisoprolol 1.25 mg (n=1327) or placebo (n=1320) daily, the drug being progressively increased to a maximum of 10 mg per day. Patients were followed up for a mean of 1.3 years. Analysis was by intention to treat.
Findings: CIBIS-II was stopped early, after the second interim analysis, because bisoprolol showed a significant mortality benefit. All-cause mortality was significantly lower with bisoprolol than on placebo (156 [11.8%] vs 228 [17.3%] deaths with a hazard ratio of 0.66 (95% CI 0.54-0.81, p<0.0001). There were significantly fewer sudden deaths among patients on bisoprolol than in those on placebo (48 [3.6%] vs 83 [6.3%] deaths), with a hazard ratio of 0.56 (0.39-0.80, p=0.0011). Treatment effects were independent of the severity or cause of heart failure.
Interpretation: beta-blocker therapy had benefits for survival in stable heart-failure patients. Results should not, however, be extrapolated to patients with severe class IV symptoms and recent instability because safety and efficacy has not been established in these patients