Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
1.
J Endovasc Ther ; : 15266028231182382, 2023 Jul 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37394832

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The value of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance during peripheral vascular revascularization procedures is incompletely understood. Moreover, data on long-term clinical outcomes and costs are limited. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes and costs between IVUS and contrast angiography alone in patients undergoing peripheral revascularization procedures in Japan. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective comparative analysis was performed using the Japanese Medical Data Vision insurance claims database. All patients undergoing revascularization for peripheral artery disease (PAD) between April 2009 and July 2019 were included. Patients were followed until July 2020, death, or a subsequent revascularization procedure for PAD. Two patient groups were compared: one undergoing IVUS imaging or the other contrast angiography alone. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac and limb events, including all-cause-mortality, endovascular thrombolysis, subsequent revascularization procedures for PAD, stroke, acute myocardial infarction, and major amputations. Total health care costs were documented over the follow-up and compared between groups, using a bootstrap method. RESULTS: The study included 3956 patients in the IVUS group and 5889 in the angiography alone group. Intravascular ultrasound was significantly associated with reduced risk of a subsequent revascularization procedure (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.25 [0.22-0.28]) and major adverse cardiac and limb events (0.69 [0.65-0.73]). The total costs were significantly lower in the IVUS group, with a mean cost saving over follow-up of $18 173 [$7 695-$28 595] per patient. CONCLUSION: The use of IVUS during peripheral revascularization provides superior long-term clinical outcomes at lower costs compared with contrast angiography alone, warranting wider adoption and fewer barriers to IVUS reimbursement for patients with PAD undergoing routine revascularization. CLINICAL IMPACT: Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance during peripheral vascular revascularization has been introduced to improve the precision of the procedure. However, questions over the benefit of IVUS in terms of long-term clinical outcome and over cost have limited its use in everyday clinical practice. This study, performed in a Japanese health insurance claims database, demonstrates that use of IVUS provides a superior clinical outcome over the long term at a lower cost compared to angiography alone. These findings should encourage clinicians to use IVUS in routine peripheral vascular revascularization procedures and encourage providers to reduce barriers to use.

2.
J Med Econ ; 26(1): 1357-1367, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37819734

RESUMEN

AIMS: Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has been demonstrated to be cost-saving relative to oral anticoagulants for stroke prophylaxis in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in the United States and Europe. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of LAAC with the Watchman device relative to warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for stroke risk reduction in NVAF from a Japanese public healthcare payer perspective. METHODS: A Markov model was developed with 70-year-old patients using a lifetime time horizon. LAAC clinical inputs were from pooled, 5-year PROTECT AF and PREVAIL trials; warfarin and DOAC inputs were from published meta-analyses. Baseline stroke and bleeding risks were from the SALUTE trial on LAAC. Cost inputs were from the Japanese Medical Data Vision database. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Over the lifetime time horizon, LAAC was less costly than warfarin (savings of JPY 1,878,335, equivalent to US $17,600) and DOACs (savings of JPY 1,198,096, equivalent to US $11,226). LAAC also provided 1.500 more incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) than warfarin and 0.996 more than DOACs. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, LAAC was cost-effective relative to warfarin and DOACs in 99.98% and 99.73% of simulations, respectively. LAAC dominated (had higher cumulative QALYs and was less costly than) warfarin and DOACs in 89.94% and 83.35% of simulations, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Over a lifetime time horizon, LAAC is cost-saving relative to warfarin and DOACs for stroke risk reduction in NVAF patients in Japan and is associated with improved quality-of-life.


This study examined the cost-effectiveness of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) compared to oral anticoagulants for stroke risk reduction among individuals with a specific type of irregular heart rhythm called non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of LAAC using the Watchman device in comparison to warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) from the perspective of Japan's public healthcare system. To investigate this, a computer-based model was developed involving 70-year-old patients over their lifetime. Data from notable studies such as the PROTECT AF and PREVAIL trials (covering 5 years) for LAAC and published meta-analyses for warfarin and DOACs were incorporated into the model. Baseline stroke and bleeding risks were derived from the SALUTE trial on LAAC. Cost inputs were based on data from the Japanese Medical Data Vision database. Additionally, we performed thorough cost-effectiveness analyses, including probabilistic and one-way sensitivity assessments. Our findings revealed that, over a lifetime, LAAC was more cost-effective than both warfarin and DOACs. Further, LAAC contributed an additional 1.500 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared to warfarin and 0.996 QALYs compared to DOACs. In the long-term, adopting LAAC as an alternative to warfarin and DOACs is a cost-effective strategy for reducing stroke risk in NVAF patients in Japan. Moreover, it is associated with enhanced quality-of-life. These findings hold significant implications for informing decision-making in healthcare policies and clinical practices for NVAF patients.


Asunto(s)
Apéndice Atrial , Fibrilación Atrial , Accidente Cerebrovascular , Humanos , Anciano , Fibrilación Atrial/complicaciones , Fibrilación Atrial/tratamiento farmacológico , Warfarina/uso terapéutico , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Japón , Apéndice Atrial/cirugía , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Accidente Cerebrovascular/prevención & control , Accidente Cerebrovascular/complicaciones , Resultado del Tratamiento
3.
Pharmacoeconomics ; 24(8): 767-81, 2006.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16898847

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To compare the cost effectiveness of azathioprine (AZA), methotrexate (MTX) and no immunosuppression for maintaining remission of moderate to severe inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in New Zealand Caucasians, and to determine whether prospective testing for poor metabolisers of AZA by genotype or phenotype is cost effective. METHODS: Pharmacoeconomic models were developed to compare treatment costs and effects (QALYs) in theoretical populations of 1,000 IBD patients over a 1-year period. Efficacy and tolerability profiles for AZA and MTX were taken from the literature. The costs (year 2004 values) of the drugs and treatment of adverse effects were estimated from New Zealand drug and service costs. Representations of the patients' health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) were obtained from clinicians via the EQ-5D health state classification system and valued using the New Zealand EQ-5D social tariff. The effects of genotyping or phenotyping a population for thiopurine methyltransferase (TPMT) status were compared using the prevalence of TPMT deficiency in Caucasians, the relative risks of neutropenia and the associated costs. RESULTS: Net cost savings (vs no immunosuppressant treatment) of approximately 2.5 million and 1 million New Zealand dollars were realised for AZA and MTX, respectively, for the theoretical 1,000 patients, and AZA generated 877 QALYs compared with 633 for MTX. Phenotype and genotype testing generated net cost savings (vs no testing) of 120,000 and 11,000 New Zealand dollars, respectively. Savings related to phenotype tests were greater because of the lower assay costs of phenotype testing and a greater likelihood of pre-empting neutropenia. CONCLUSION: Our model suggests that both MTX and AZA may generate significant net cost savings and benefits for patients with IBD in New Zealand, with AZA likely to be more cost effective than MTX. Prospective testing for poor metabolisers of AZA may also be cost effective, with phenotype testing likely to be more cost effective than genotype testing.


Asunto(s)
Azatioprina/uso terapéutico , Enfermedades Inflamatorias del Intestino/tratamiento farmacológico , Metotrexato/uso terapéutico , Metiltransferasas/genética , Azatioprina/economía , Ahorro de Costo , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Economía Farmacéutica , Genotipo , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Humanos , Enfermedades Inflamatorias del Intestino/genética , Enfermedades Inflamatorias del Intestino/psicología , Metotrexato/economía , Farmacogenética , Estudios Prospectivos , Calidad de Vida
4.
Eur J Health Econ ; 17(2): 185-93, 2016 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25669755

RESUMEN

AIMS: To examine the cost-effectiveness of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) use during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) in treating coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS AND RESULTS: A Markov model was constructed with a lifetime horizon to compare costs and health outcomes between IVUS-guided PCI and PCI guided solely by angiography from an Italian healthcare payer perspective. The population examined included CAD patients undergoing PCI with DES. From a healthcare payer perspective, the resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year was negative in the base-case scenario (i.e., IVUS benefit assumed to persist beyond the first year). When IVUS benefit was assumed to be limited to the first year, the ICER increased to €9,624. This conclusion remained consistent even when scenarios varied regarding the duration of the device's effect. Furthermore, benefits of using IVUS were greater for patients with acute coronary syndrome, renal insufficiency, and diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Using IVUS with angiography is a dominant strategy in Italy, and results demonstrate that it is desirable to target those at a greater risk of restenosis (i.e., patients with diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and acute coronary syndrome), who tend to benefit more from accurate stent implantation. Further information is necessary regarding the long-term benefits of IVUS, however sensitivity analysis presented in this research demonstrates a strong argument supporting the cost-effectiveness of IVUS.


Asunto(s)
Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/economía , Ultrasonografía Intervencional/economía , Enfermedad Coronaria/economía , Enfermedad Coronaria/cirugía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/economía , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Italia , Cadenas de Markov , Persona de Mediana Edad , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida
5.
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging ; 4(5): 549-56, 2011 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21565744

RESUMEN

Emergency department presentations with chest pain are expensive and often unrelated to coronary artery disease (CAD). Coronary computed tomographic angiography (CTA) may allow earlier discharge of low-risk patients, resulting in cost savings. We modeled clinical and economic outcomes of diagnostic strategies in patients with chest pain and at low risk of CAD: exercise electrocardiography (ECG), stress single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), stress echocardiography, and a CTA strategy comprising an initial CTA scan with confirmatory SPECT for indeterminate results. Our results suggest that a 2-step diagnostic strategy of CTA with SPECT for intermediate scans is likely to be less costly and more effective for the diagnosis of a patient group at low risk of CAD and a prevalence of 2% to 30%. The CTA strategies were cost saving (lower costs, higher quality-adjusted life-years) compared with stress ECG, echocardiography, and SPECT. Confirming intermediate/indeterminate CTA scans with SPECT results in cost savings and quality-adjusted life-year gains due to reduced hospitalization of patients who returned false-positive initial CTA test. However, CTA may be associated with a higher event rate in negative patients than SPECT, and the diagnostic and prognostic information for the use of CTA in the emergency department is evolving. Large comparative, randomized, controlled trials of the different diagnostic strategies are needed to compare the long-term costs and consequences of each strategy in a population of defined low-risk patients in the emergency department.


Asunto(s)
Síndrome Coronario Agudo/diagnóstico por imagen , Angina de Pecho/diagnóstico por imagen , Dolor en el Pecho/diagnóstico por imagen , Angiografía Coronaria/economía , Técnicas de Apoyo para la Decisión , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/economía , Costos de Hospital , Imagen de Perfusión Miocárdica/economía , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/economía , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/complicaciones , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/economía , Algoritmos , Angina de Pecho/economía , Angina de Pecho/etiología , Dolor en el Pecho/economía , Dolor en el Pecho/etiología , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Ecocardiografía de Estrés/economía , Hospitalización/economía , Humanos , Modelos Económicos , Selección de Paciente , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Tomografía Computarizada de Emisión de Fotón Único/economía
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA