RESUMO
The clinical effectiveness of heart valve replacement surgery has been well documented. Mechanical and homograft valves are used routinely for replacement of damaged heart valves. Homograft valves are produced in our country but we import the mechanical valves. To our knowledge the cost-effectiveness of homograft valve has not been assessed. The objective of the present study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of homograft valve replacement with mechanical valve replacement surgery. Samples were selected from 200 patients that underwent homograft and mechanical heart valve replacement surgery in Imam-Khomeini hospital [2000 - 2005]. In each group we enrolled 30 patients. Quality of life was measured using the SF-36 health survey and efficacy was measured in QALYs. For each group we calculated the price of heart valve and hospitalization charges. Finally the cost-effectiveness of each treatment modalities were summarized as costs per QALYs gained. Forty males and 20 females participated in the study. The mean score of quality of life was 66.06 [SD= 9.22] in homograft group and 57.85 [SD= 11.30] in mechanical group [P< 0.05]. The mean QALYs gained in homograft group was 0.67 more than mechanical group. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] revealed a cost savings of 9,604,440 IRRials for each quality-adjusted life year gained in homograft group. Despite limitation of this introductory study, we concluded that homograft valve replacement was more effective and less expensive than mechanical valve. These findings can encourage healthcare managers and policy makers to support the production of homograft valves and allocate more recourse for developing such activities