FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 336:1840-1841 June 19, 1997 Number 25 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text Purchase this article Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited Related Article by Hlatky, M. A. PubMed Citation

To the Editor: Hlatky et al. (Jan. 9 issue)¹ performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of data derived from a subgroup of the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) study, a randomized trial comparing coronary-artery bypass surgery with coronary angioplasty. After five years of follow-up, they found that the costs associated with bypass surgery were $2,664 higher than those associated with angioplasty. Noting that patients assigned to bypass surgery had "slightly better average survival rates (0.10 life-year)," they calculated a cost-effectiveness ratio of $26,117 per year of life added by surgery.

In fact, this study revealed no significant difference in survival between the . . . [Full Text of this Article]

References

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Trippoli, S., Vaiani, M., Messori, A., Tendi, E., Hillner, B. E. (2000). Survival Gain in Cost-Effectiveness Studies. JCO 18: 3318-3318 [Full Text]  
• Trippoli, S., Messori, A., Freedberg, K. A., Seage, G. R. III, Losina, E., Craven, D. E., Scharfstein, J. A., Paltiel, A. D., Weinstein, M. C. (1998). Cost-effectiveness Analyses of Statistically Ineffective Treatments. JAMA 280: 1992-1993 [Full Text]