Health economic impact of first-pass success among patients with acute ischemic stroke treated with mechanical thrombectomy: a United States and European perspective.

BACKGROUND: First-pass effect (FPE), restoring complete or near complete reperfusion (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) 2c-3) in a single pass, is an independent predictor for good functional outcomes in the endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke. The economic implications of achieving FPE have not been assessed. OBJECTIVE: To assess the economic impact of achieving complete or near complete reperfusion after the first pass. METHODS: Post hoc analyses were conducted using ARISE II study data. The target population consisted of patients in whom mTICI 2c-3 was achieved, stratified into two groups: (1) mTICI 2c-3 achieved after the first pass (FPE group) or (2) after multiple passes (non-FPE group). Baseline characteristics, clinical outcomes, and healthcare resource use were compared between groups. Costs from peer-reviewed literature were applied to assess cost consequences from the perspectives of the United States (USA), France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden, and United Kingdom (UK). RESULTS: Among patients who achieved mTICI 2c-3 (n=172), FPE was achieved in 53% (n=91). A higher proportion of patients in the FPE group reached good functional outcomes (90-day modified Rankin Scale score 0-2 80.46% vs 61.04%, p<0.01). The patients in the FPE group had a shorter mean length of stay (6.10 vs 9.48 days, p<0.01) and required only a single stent retriever, whereas 35% of patients in the non-FPE group required at least one additional device. Driven by improvement in clinical outcomes, the FPE group had lower procedural/hospitalization-related (24-33% reduction) and annual care (11-27% reduction) costs across all countries. CONCLUSIONS: FPE resulted in improved clinical outcomes, translating into lower healthcare resource use and lower estimated costs.

Pharmacoeconomics of parenteral nutrition in surgical and critically ill patients receiving structured triglycerides in China.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: A prior meta-analysis showed favorable metabolic effects of structured triglyceride (STG) lipid emulsions in surgical and critically ill patients compared with mixed medium-chain/long-chain triglycerides (MCT/LCT) emulsions. Limited data on clinical outcomes precluded pharmacoeconomic analysis. We performed an updated meta-analysis and developed a cost model to compare overall costs for STGs vs MCT/LCTs in Chinese hospitals. METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: We searched Medline, Embase, Wanfang Data, the China Hospital Knowledge Database, and Google Scholar for clinical trials comparing STGs to mixed MCT/LCTs in surgical or critically ill adults published between October 10, 2013 and September 19, 2015. Newly identified studies were pooled with the prior studies and an updated meta-analysis was performed. A deterministic simulation model was used to compare the effects of STGs and mixed MCT/LCT's on Chinese hospital costs. RESULTS: The literature search identified six new trials, resulting in a total of 27 studies in the updated meta-analysis. Statistically significant differences favoring STGs were observed for cumulative nitrogen balance, pre- albumin and albumin concentrations, plasma triglycerides, and liver enzymes. STGs were also associated with a significant reduction in the length of hospital stay (mean difference, -1.45 days; 95% confidence interval, -2.48 to -0.43; p=0.005) versus mixed MCT/LCTs. Cost analysis demonstrated a net cost benefit of ¥675 compared with mixed MCT/LCTs. CONCLUSIONS: STGs are associated with improvements in metabolic function and reduced length of hospitalization in surgical and critically ill patients compared with mixed MCT/LCT emulsions. Cost analysis using data from Chinese hospitals showed a corresponding cost benefit.

The importance of growth factors for the treatment of chronic wounds in the case of diabetic foot ulcers.

INTRODUCTION: Ulcers as a result of diabetes mellitus are a serious problem with an enormous impact on the overall global disease burden due to the increasing prevalence of diabetes. Because of long hospital stays, rehabilitation, often required home care and the use of social services diabetic foot complications are costly. Therapy with growth factors could be an effective and innovative add-on to standard wound care. RESEARCH QUESTIONS: What is the benefit of therapies with growth factors alone or in combination with other technologies in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcer assessed regarding medical, economical, social, ethical and juridical aspects? METHODS: We systematically searched relevant databases limited to English and German language and publications since 1990. Cost values were adjusted to the price level of 2008 and converted into Euro. A review and an assessment of the quality of publications were conducted following approved methodical standards conforming to evidence-based medicine and health economics. RESULTS: We identified 25 studies (14 randomized controlled trials (RCT), nine cost-effectiveness analyses, two meta-analyses). The RCT compared an add-on therapy to standard wound care with standard wound care/placebo alone or extracellular wound matrix: in six studies becaplermin, in two rhEGF, in one bFGF, and in five studies the metabolically active skin grafts Dermagraft and Apligraf. The study duration ranged from twelve to 20 weeks and the study population included between 17 to 382 patients, average 130 patients. The treatment with becaplermin, rhEGF and skin implants Dermagraft and Apligraf showed in eight out of 13 studies an advantage concerning complete wound closure and the time to complete wound healing. Evidence for a benefit of treatment with bFGF could not be found. In four out of 14 studies the proportion of adverse events was 30% per study group with no difference between the treatment groups. The methodological quality of the studies was affected by significant deficiencies. The results showed becaplermin being cost-effective whereas no obvious statement can be made regarding Dermagraft and Apligraf because of diverging cost bases and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. DISCUSSION: Differences in standard wound care are complicating the comparison of study results. Taking into consideration the small to very small sample sizes and other methodological flaws with high potential of bias, the validity of the results with regard to effectiveness and cost-effectiveness has to be considered limited. The duration of treatment and follow-up examinations is not long enough to assess the sustainability of the intervention and the surveillance of ulcer recurrences or treatment related adverse events like the development of malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: There are indications of an advantage for the add-on therapy with growth factors in diabetic foot ulcers concerning complete wound closure and the time to complete wound healing. Further more studies of high methodological quality with adequate sample sizes and sufficient follow-up periods are necessary also investigating patient-relevant parameters like the health-related quality of life, the acceptance and tolerance of the intervention in addition to clinical outcomes.