Primary Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death: Can We Afford the Cost of Cardioverter-Defibrillators? Data from the Search-MI Registry-Italian Sub-study

Background: Large randomized trials show that in appropriately selected patients with left ventricular dysfunction, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) can improve overall survival at 2–5 years. Since direct implementation of the criteria used in the MADIT II and SCD-HeFT will lead to a marked rise in ICD implants, there is a growing fear that increased use of ICDs may cause a dramatic burden to health care systems. The ICD has traditionally been seen as an expensive form of treatment, which is difficult to accept at the first look. This is mainly due to the nonlinear character of the ICD investment, characterized by high initial expenditure, followed by a deferred pay-off in terms of clinical benefits. Cost-effectiveness analysis may help provide a different perspective on the problem of ICD cost, as may estimation of the daily cost of ICD treatment, assuming a time horizon of 5–7 years—a particularly interesting subject for further registry studies.
Methods and Results: Based on real expenditure data from 2002 to 2005, as recorded in the Search-MI Registry-Italian Sub-study of patients implanted on MADIT II indications, we estimated the daily costs associated with the device and leads. Over a 5–7 year time horizon, the average daily cost was estimated to be €4.60–€6.70. Translation of these figures into U.S. market conditions suggests a daily cost of around $7.90–$11.40.
Conclusions: These findings appear useful to help evaluate the affordability of ICD in comparison with other therapeutic options in a context of limited available economic resources.     

Determination of 3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (DOPA) in plasma and cerebrospinal fluid by high performance liquid chromatography with electrochemical detection

We report a reliable method for determining DOPA levels in plasma and cerebrospinal fluid. The method is based on complete conversion of DOPA to dopamine and quantification by HPLC-ECD of the dopamine formed. Lower limit of detection was 0.5 nmol/l. No differences in plasma DOPA levels were found between normal children (0-15 yr, n = 60), normal adults (n = 39) and patients with essential hypertension (n = 40) or Parkinson's disease (no DOPA therapy, n = 30). In normal individuals and in patients with essential hypertension venous plasma levels were higher than arterial levels (10.2 vs 9.3 nmol/l, p less than 0.001, V/A ratio 1.11 (SD 0.08), n = 15). Sympathetic stimuli (standing, tilting, bicycle exercise, tyramine) did not influence DOPA levels. In untreated depressed patients (n = 10) and in non-parkinsonian neurological patients (n = 12) cerebrospinal fluid levels of DOPA were 4.5 (SD 2.4) and 5.2 (SD 1.3) nmol/l respectively. A direct method for the measurement of DOPA by HPLC-ECD after deproteinization of plasma is also described and compared with the conversion method. Good agreement was found when plasma DOPA levels exceeded 0.25 mumol/l (y(conversion method) = 0.943x (direct method) + 0.118; n = 60; r = 0.985). The direct method, because of greater simplicity and the possibility of simultaneous measurement of the DOPA metabolite 3-O-methyldopa, is the method of choice with plasma samples from DOPA-treated patients. In non-DOPA treated individuals the conversion method is superior and has proved to be an accurate and sensitive method for the determination of DOPA levels in plasma and cerebrospinal fluid.