MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2621205648 · doi:10.1161/hyp.60.suppl_1.a319

Abstract 319: Potential Lifetime Cost-Effectiveness of Catheter-Based Renal Sympathetic Denervation in Patients with Resistant Hypertension

2012· article· en· W2621205648 on OpenAlexaff
Marc Dorenkamp, Klaus Bonaventura, Alexander Leber, Julia Schulze, Christian Sohns, Leif‐Hendrik Boldt, Wilhelm Haverkamp, Ulrich Frei, Mattias Roser

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionBlood pressureStroke (engine)CardiologyQuality-adjusted life yearCost effectivenessInternal medicineAdverse effectEmergency medicineAnginaIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims - Recent studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of catheter-based renal sympathetic denervation (RD) for the treatment of resistant hypertension. We aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of this approach separately for men and women of different ages. Methods and results - A Markov state-transition model accounting for costs, survival, quality of life, and incremental cost-effectiveness was developed to compare RD with best medical therapy (BMT). The model ran from age 30 to 100 years or death, with a Markov cycle length of 1 year. All patients entered the model with elevated systolic blood pressure (SBP, 180 mmHg), but free from prior cardiovascular disease (CVD) events. Patients could remain in this disease-free state or could have one of the following primary CVD events: myocardial infarction, angina, stroke or heart failure. After an event, patients transitioned into chronic disease states and/or could suffer from secondary CVD events. In the base case scenario, RD resulted in a sustained SBP reduction of 20 mmHg and in a corresponding relative risk reduction of adverse CVD events and death. The cost analysis was conducted from a health care payer perspective. Effectiveness was expressed as quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) gained. Costs and effects were discounted at 3% per annum, respectively. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the robustness of the results. As compared with BMT, RD gained 0.99 QALYs in men and 0.91 QALYs in women 60 years of age at an additional cost of $3,265 and $2,594, respectively. As the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio increased with patient age, RD consistently yielded more QALYs at lower costs in lower age groups. Considering a willingness to pay threshold of $50,000/QALY, there was a 95% probability that RD would remain cost-effective up to an age of 82 and 80 years in men and women, respectively. Cost-effectiveness was influenced most by the extent of SBP lowering by RD, the rate of RD non-responders, and the costs associated with the RD procedure. Conclusion - RD offers a cost-effective treatment option for the prevention of CVD events in patients with resistant hypertension. An earlier intervention produces better cost-effectiveness ratios.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHypertensionSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207