The cost of implantable defibrillators: perceptions and reality.
OBJECTIVE
Recent guidelines have recommended more wide-ranging indications for the use of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy, yet even more restrained previous guidelines have not been implemented for a variety of reasons.


RESULTS
This brief review critically examines the reasons most frequently put forward to explain this failure. Contrary to the frequently repeated speculation that the risk stratification for sudden death and hence prophylactic placement of ICDs is reasonably accurate, there is little cost difference between pharmacotherapy and ICD treatment over the long term. ICD therapy does not utilize an undue proportion of the healthcare budget, and the healthcare systems in Europe can afford this therapy.


CONCLUSIONS
Financial reasons are neither accurate nor adequate explanations for the failure of the European medical community to implement European guidelines for the implantation of ICDs for primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death.
Camm
John
J
St George's University of London, Cranmer Terrace, London SW17 0RE, UK. jcamm@sgul.ac.uk
Klein
Helmut
H
Nisam
Seah
S
D002317:Cardiovascular Agents / Q000191:economics; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D016757:Death, Sudden, Cardiac / Q000517:prevention & control*; D017147:Defibrillators, Implantable / Q000191:economics*; D016527:Drug Costs; D005102:Health Expenditures; D006801:Humans; D019057:Quality-Adjusted Life Years
D002317:Cardiovascular Agents