OBJECTIVES: To systematically identify evidence on the cost-effectiveness (CE), healthcare costs and resource use (HCRU), quality of life (QoL) and health-state utilities (HSU) associated with treatment of obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM).

METHODS: Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, and EconLit were searched with no language or geographic restrictions from database inception until 3 December 2021 for relevant CE, HCRU, QoL and HSU studies evaluating obstructive HCM treatment for adults. CE studies were restricted to assessments of pharmacological interventions and septal reduction therapies (SRT), while other types of data were allowed pertaining to any intervention. Grey literature was searched from 2019 until the same date.

RESULTS: 2,286 records were identified and 35 studies met inclusion criteria. No studies assessing the CE of treatments were found. 27 studies reported HCRU: 1 each from Belgium, Chile, Sweden and Spain, 2 each from Japan and the United Kingdom, and 19 from the United States (US). 21 studies reported resource use (RU) associated with SRT or pacing, while 3 studies reported on disease state. 3 studies included both costs and RU (2 SRT, 1 disease state). Only direct costs were reported in the 10 studies reporting costs only. Costs were predominantly from the US; 6 studies focussed on SRT or pacing and 4 on disease costs. 11 studies reported QoL and HSUs: the KCCQ, HCMSQ, EQ-5D-5L, EQ-VAS, SF-36, Karolinska questionnaire, Karolinska QoL VAS, SF-12, MLHFQ scales were included. 1 study reported data associated with mavacamten treatment, while 10 studies reported QoL associated with SRT or pacing. No estimates for disutilities were found.

CONCLUSIONS: There were no CE studies identified, and other economic data, where available, pertained mostly to SRT, were heterogeneous in nature, and should be interpreted with caution. Further research is needed to generate evidence on the economic and humanistic burden of obstructive HCM.