Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of insertable cardiac monitors (ICMs) compared to standard of care (SoC) for detecting atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients at high risk of stroke (CHADS2 >2), in the US. Background: ICMs are a clinically effective means of detecting AF in high-risk patients, prompting the initiation of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs). Their cost-effectiveness from a US clinical payer perspective is not yet known. Methods: Using patient data from the REVEAL AF trial (n= 446, average CHADS2 score= 2.9), a Markov model estimated the lifetime costs and benefits of detecting AF with an ICM or with SoC (namely, intermittent use of electrocardiograms [ECGs] and 24-hour Holter monitors). Ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes, intra- and extra-cranial hemorrhages, and minor bleeds were modelled. Diagnostic and device costs were included, plus costs of treating stroke and bleeding events and of NOACs. Costs and health outcomes, measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), were discounted at 3% per annum. One-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were undertaken. Results: Lifetime per-patient cost for ICM was $58,132 vs. $52,019 for SoC. ICMs generated a total 7.75 QALYs vs. 7.59 for SoC, with 34 fewer strokes projected per 1,000 patients. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $35,452 per QALY gained. ICMs were cost-effective in 72% of PSA simulations, using a $50,000 per QALY threshold. Conclusions: The use of ICMs to identify AF in a high-risk population is likely to be cost-effective in the US healthcare setting.

Background In patients with chronic heart failure, QRS duration is a consistent predictor of poor outcomes. It has been suggested that for indicated patients, cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) could come sooner in the treatment algorithm, perhaps in parallel with the attainment of optimal guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT). We investigated differences in left ventricular (LV) remodelling in those with narrow QRS (NQRS) compared to wide QRS (WQRS) in the absence of CRT, whether an early CRT strategy resulted in unnecessary implants and the effect of early CRT on outcomes. Methods and results Our cohort consisted of 214 consecutive patients with LV ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35% who underwent repeat echocardiography 1-year after enrolment. Of these, 116 patients had NQRS, and 98 had WQRS of whom 40 received CRT within 1-year and 58 did not. In the absence of CRT patients with WQRS had less LV reverse remodelling compared to those with NQRS, with differences in ΔLVEF (+9% vs 2 %, p<0.001), ΔLV end-diastolic diameter (-2mm vs -1mm, p=0.095) and ΔLV end-systolic diameter (-4.5mm vs -2mm, p=0.038). LVEF was more likely to improve by ≥10% if patients had NQRS or received CRT (p=0.08). Thirteen (24%) patients with WQRS achieved an LVEF >35% in the absence of CRT, however none achieved >50%. Conclusions A strictly linear approach to HF therapy might lead to delays to optimal treatment in those patients with the most to gain from CRT and the least to gain from GDMT.