Fast-track thrombolysis protocol for acute limb ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Catheter-directed thrombolysis in the treatment of acute lower extremity arterial occlusions often requires several interventional sessions to generate successful outcomes. It is typically an expensive procedure, necessitating extended hospital length of stay (LOS) that may be associated with an increase in both local and systemic hemorrhagic complications. Five years ago, we created the fast-track thrombolysis protocol for arteries (FTTP-A) to deal with these concerns. The goal of our protocol is to re-establish patency during the first session of thrombolysis, thus decreasing costs and complications associated with prolonged periods of thrombolytic exposure. METHODS: A retrospective study of 42 patients who were treated for acute limb ischemia at our institution by FTTP-A from January 2014 to February 2019 was performed. FTTP-A includes periadventitial lidocaine injection at the arterial puncture site under ultrasound guidance, contrast arteriography of the entire targeted segment, pharmacomechanical rheolytic thrombectomy of the occluded arterial segment, tissue plasminogen activator infusion along the occluded segment, balloon maceration of the thrombus, and (if deemed necessary) placement of a stent in an area of significant (≥30%) stenosis that is refractory to balloon angioplasty and thrombolysis. After the stenosis or thrombus is cleared, patients are prescribed an oral anticoagulant agent. RESULTS: Primary FTTP-A (50 total interventions) was performed in 42 patients. The median age of patients was 67.2 ± 12.2 years (range, 41-98 years), and 54.8% were male; 59.5% of the procedures were performed on the left lower extremity. Initial arterial access was obtained through the common femoral artery in 39 of 42 cases (92.9%); in the remaining 3 cases, it was obtained in a left bypass access site, a right femoral-popliteal graft, and a right femoral-femoral graft. The mean operative time was 148.9 ± 62.9 minutes (range, 83-313 minutes), and the mean volume of tissue plasminogen activator infused was 9.7 ± 4.0 mg (range, 2-20 mg). The median cost including medications and interventional tools was $4673.19 per procedure. The mean postoperative LOS was 3.1 ± 4.5 days (range, 1-25 days). Median postoperative LOS was 1 day. Mean postoperative follow-up was 27 ± 19.2 months (range, 0-62 months). Single-session FTTP-A was successful in 81% (n = 34/42) of patients; the remaining 8 patients (19%) required a single additional session. Of the 42 patients, 34 (81%) required arterial stenting. Periprocedural complications consisted of one patient with hematuria, which resolved, and one patient with thrombocytopenia, which resolved. No patients experienced rethrombosis within 30 days of FTTP-A. During the 5-year study period, there was no significant local or systemic hemorrhage, limb loss, or mortality related to this protocol. CONCLUSIONS: FTTP-A appears to be a safe, efficacious, and cost-effective procedure in the resolution of acute lower extremity arterial occlusions.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of low-dose direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) for the prevention of cancer-associated thrombosis in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated that low-dose direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), including rivaroxaban and apixaban, may help reduce the incidence of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE). METHODS: A cost-utility analysis was performed from the health sector perspective using a Markov state-transition model in patients with cancer who are at intermediate-to-high risk for VTE. Transition probability, relative risk, cost, and utility inputs were obtained from a meta-analysis of the RCTs and relevant epidemiology studies. Differences in cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per patient were calculated over a lifetime horizon. One-way, probabilistic, and scenario sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: In patients with cancer at intermediate-to-high risk for VTE, treatment with low-dose DOAC thromboprophylaxis for 6 months, compared with placebo, was associated with 32 per 1000 fewer VTE and 11 per 1000 more major bleeding episodes over a lifetime. The incremental cost and QALY increases were $1445 and 0.12, respectively, with an ICER of $11,947 per QALY gained. Key drivers of ICER variations included the relative risks of VTE and bleeding as well as drug cost. This strategy was 94% cost effective at the threshold of $50,000 per QALY. The selection of patients with Khorana scores ≥3 yielded the greatest value, with an ICER of $5794 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose DOAC thromboprophylaxis for 6 months appears to be cost-effective in patients with cancer who are at intermediate-to-high risk for VTE. The implementation of this strategy in patients with Khorana scores ≥3 may lead to the highest cost-benefit ratio.

Cost effectiveness analysis of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) versus dalteparin for the treatment of cancer associated thrombosis (CAT) in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: While trials have demonstrated non-inferiority of direct oral anticoagulant drugs (DOAC) to low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) for the treatment of cancer associated thrombosis (CAT), it is unclear if the newer intervention is cost-effective. METHODS: We performed a cost-utility analysis using a Markov state-transition model over a time horizon of 60 months in a hypothetical cohort of 65-year-old patients with active malignancy and first acute symptomatic CAT who were eligible to receive either rivaroxaban/edoxaban or dalteparin. We obtained transition probability, relative risk, cost, and utility inputs from the literature. We estimated the differential impact on costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient and performed one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to test the robustness of results. RESULTS: Using the base-case analysis over 60 months, DOAC versus dalteparin was associated with an incremental cost reduction of $24,129 with an incremental QALY reduction of 0.04. In the one-way sensitivity analysis, the cost of dalteparin contributed the most to the incremental cost difference; relative risk of death related to underlying cancer contributed the most of the incremental QALY difference. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the base-case analysis, with a large reduction in cost but small reduction in QALYs. CONCLUSION: Rivaroxaban or edoxaban as compared to dalteparin is cost saving from a payer's perspective for the treatment of CAT. Professional organizations and healthcare systems may want to consider this analysis in future practice recommendations.

Cost-effectiveness of edoxaban versus dalteparin for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis.

Malignancy is a well-established risk factor for venous thromboembolism and while low-molecular-weight heparin therapy has been standard of care for cancer-associated thrombosis for many years, many patients find injection therapy burdensome. The direct oral anticoagulant edoxaban has been shown to be noninferior to dalteparin for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis. In a Markov simulation model, edoxaban with 6-month time horizon and a United States societal perspective with 2017 US dollars, edoxaban was the preferred strategy in the general cancer population (6-month cost $6061 with 0.34 quality adjusted life years) and in a subgroup of patients with gastrointestinal malignancy (6-month cost $7227 with 0.34 quality adjusted life years). The incremental cost effectiveness ratio of dalteparin compared to edoxaban was $1,873,535 in the general oncology population and $694,058 in the gastrointestinal malignancy population.

Clinical and Economic Benefits of Stent Grafts in Dysfunctional and Thrombosed Hemodialysis Access Graft Circuits in the REVISE Randomized Trial.

PURPOSE: To compare reinterventions and associated costs to maintain arteriovenous graft hemodialysis access circuits after rescue with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA), with or without concurrent Viabahn stent grafts, over 24 months. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter (n = 30 sites) study evaluated reintervention number, type, and cost in 269 patients randomized to undergo placement of stent grafts or PTA alone. Outcomes were 24-month average cumulative number of reinterventions, associated costs, and total costs for all patients and in 4 groups based on index treatment and clinical presentation (thrombosed or dysfunctional). RESULTS: Over 24 months, the patients in the stent graft arm had a 27% significant reduction in the average number of reinterventions within the circuit compared to the PTA arm (3.7 stent graft vs 5.1 PTA; P = .005) and similar total costs ($27,483 vs $28,664; P = .49). In thrombosed grafts, stent grafts significantly reduced the number of reinterventions (3.7 stent graft vs 6.2 PTA; P = .022) and had significantly lower total costs compared to the PTA arm ($30,329 vs $37,206; P = .027). In dysfunctional grafts, no statistical difference was observed in the number of reinterventions or total costs (3.7 stent graft vs 4.4 PTA; P = .12, and $25,421 stent graft and $22,610 PTA; P = .14). CONCLUSIONS: Over 24 months, the use of stent grafts significantly reduced the number of reinterventions for all patients, driven by patients presenting with thrombosed grafts. Compared to PTA, stent grafts reduced overall treatment costs for patients presenting with thrombosed grafts and had similar costs for stenotic grafts.

Ticagrelor for Secondary Prevention of Atherothrombotic Events After Myocardial Infarction: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited AstraZeneca, the manufacturer of ticagrelor (Brilique®), to submit evidence on the clinical and cost effectiveness of ticagrelor 60 mg twice daily (BID) in combination with low-dose aspirin [acetylsalicylic acid (ASA)] compared with ASA only for secondary prevention of atherothrombotic events in patients with a history of myocardial infarction (MI) and who are at increased risk of atherothrombotic events. Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd (KSR), in collaboration with Maastricht University Medical Centre+, was commissioned as the evidence review group (ERG). This paper summarises the company submission (CS), the ERG report and the NICE guidance produced by the appraisal committee (AC) for the use of ticagrelor in England and Wales. The ERG critically reviewed the clinical- and cost-effectiveness evidence in the CS. The systematic review conducted as part of the CS identified one randomised controlled trial (RCT), PEGASUS-TIMI 54. This trial reported the time to first occurrence of any event from the composite of cardiovascular death, MI and stroke as the primary outcome (hazard ratio 0.84 ticagrelor 60 mg BID vs. placebo, 95% confidence interval 0.74-0.95). The population addressed in the CS was a subgroup of the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 trial population, i.e. the 'base-case' population, which comprised patients who had experienced an MI between 1 and 2 years ago, whereas the full trial population included patients who had experienced an MI between 1 and 3 years ago. While the ERG believed the findings of this RCT to be robust, doubts concerning the applicability of the trial to UK patients were raised. The company submitted an individual patient simulation model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of ticagrelor 60 mg BID + ASA versus ASA only. Parametric time-to-event models were used to estimate the time to first and subsequent (cardiovascular) events, time to treatment discontinuation and time to adverse events. The company's base-case analysis resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £20,098 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The main issues surrounding the cost effectiveness of ticagrelor 60 mg BID + ASA were the use of parametric time-to-event models estimated based on the full trial population instead of being fitted to the 'label' population (the 'label' population comprised the 'base-case' population and patients who started ticagrelor 60 mg BID within 1 year of previous adenosine diphosphate inhibitor treatment), the incorrect implementation of the probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) of the individual patient simulation, and simplifications of the model structure that may have biased the health benefits and costs estimations of the intervention and comparator. The ERG believed the use of the full trial population to inform the parametric time-to-event models was not appropriate because the 'label' population was the main focus of the scope and CS. The ERG could not investigate the magnitude of the bias introduced by this assumption. The PSA of the individual patient simulation provided unreliable probabilistic results and underestimated the uncertainty surrounding the results because it was based on a single patient. The ERG used the cohort simulation presented in the cost-effectiveness model to perform its base-case and additional analyses and to obtain probabilistic results. The ERG amended the company cost-effectiveness model, which resulted in an ERG base-case ICER of £24,711 per QALY gained. In its final guidance, the AC recommended treatment with ticagrelor 60 mg BID + low-dose ASA for secondary prevention of atherothrombotic events in adults who have had an MI and are at increased risk of atherothrombotic events.

A comparison of efficacy of endovascular versus surgical repair for the treatment of arteriovenous fistula stenosis in Taiwan.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) and fistula reconstruction surgery are therapeutic options for vascular access occlusion in hemodialysis patients. However, owing to its convenience, PTA has gradually become the preferred therapeutic option for fistula stenosis or occlusion. This study investigated the effects of the two therapeutic methods on the vascular access maintenance duration (number of days) and maintenance costs of fistula in dialysis patients from different dialysis units. METHODOLOGY: In this study, 544 hemodialysis patients from 2 dialysis units in a teaching hospital in the southern area of Taiwan were included in the analysis of the frequency of PTA or revascularization surgery and the use of related medical resources by conducting a retrospective chart review. RESULTS: The frequency of PTA in the patients undergoing long-term hemodialysis was not significantly associated with their demographic characteristics. The efficacy of PTA has declined with shorter maintenance duration with increasing PTA frequency. The cost profile of PTA was more expensive than that of fistula revascularization surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, PTA was found to be just a temporary solution for fistula thrombosis, whereas fistula reconstruction surgery is inexpensive and improves survival time. Therefore, dialysis units should establish an appropriate standard of care to avoid over-reliance on PTA in order to reduce the fistula failure rate, improve the dialysis efficacy, and reduce the psychological stress in patients, as well as to reduce the maintenance costs and rationalize the medical expenses.

Low-molecular weight heparin versus vitamin K antagonists for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis: A cost-effectiveness analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) is primarily treated with low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH), a strategy based on studies showing it to be superior to the vitamin K antagonist (VKA) warfarin for preventing VTE recurrence. Subsequent analyses suggest that the magnitude of this benefit might be less than previously determined. Neither patient-focused measures of utility nor the costs of each strategy have been evaluated in the current treatment era. METHODS: This is a cost-effectiveness analysis of VKA and LMWH for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis through use of a microsimulation model of outcomes for competing anticoagulation management strategies from a 2014 United States societal perspective. RESULTS: LMWH therapy added 0.27 QALYs relative to VKA treatment with an ICER of $217,007. One-way sensitivity analysis evaluating the utility of LMWH revealed that VKA was always the preferred strategy at a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000 per QALY. Limitations include that the model incorporates a low VKA time in therapeutic range (TTR) and that the TTR in some centers may be higher thereby increasing the cost-effectiveness of the VKA strategy. Utilities for anticoagulation strategies were not derived from cancer patients, and preference is known to vary depending on how anticoagulation method is integrated with cancer treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that compared to LMWH, warfarin is a more cost-effective strategy to treat cancer-associated VTE. Although LMWH is associated with a modest increase in life expectancy, this increase comes at significant cost.

Cost analysis of the Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow (HeRO) Graft compared to the tunneled dialysis catheter.

BACKGROUND: In end-stage renal disease patients with central venous obstruction, who have limited vascular access options, the Hemodialysis Reliable Outflow (HeRO) Graft is a new alternative with a lower incidence of complications and longer effective device life compared to tunneled dialysis catheters (TDCs). We undertook an economic analysis of introducing the HeRO Graft in the UK. METHODS: A 1-year cost-consequence decision analytic model was developed comparing management with the HeRO Graft to TDCs from the perspective of the National Health Service in England. The model comprises four 3-month cycles during which the vascular access option either remains functional for hemodialysis or fails, patients can experience access-related infection and device thrombosis, and they can also accrue associated costs. Clinical input data were sourced from published studies and unit cost data from National Health Service 2014-15 Reference Costs. RESULTS: In the base case, a 100-patient cohort managed with the HeRO Graft experienced 6 fewer failed devices, 53 fewer access-related infections, and 67 fewer device thromboses compared to patients managed with TDCs. Although the initial device and placement costs for the HeRO Graft are greater than those for TDCs, savings from the lower incidence of device complications and longer effective device patency reduces these costs. Overall net annual costs are £2600 for each HeRO Graft-managed patient compared to TDC-managed patients. If the National Health Service were to reimburse hemodialysis at a uniform rate regardless of the type of vascular access, net 1-year savings of £1200 per patient are estimated for individuals managed with the HeRO Graft. CONCLUSIONS: The base case results showed a marginal net positive cost associated with vascular access with the HeRO Graft compared with TDCs for the incremental clinical benefit of reductions in patency failures, device-related thrombosis, and access-related infection events in a patient population with limited options for dialysis vascular access.

A feasibility study to inform the design of a randomised controlled trial to identify the most clinically effective and cost-effective length of Anticoagulation with Low-molecular-weight heparin In the treatment of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis (ALICAT).

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism is common in cancer patients and requires anticoagulation with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). Current data recommend LMWH for anticoagulation as far as 6 months, yet guidelines recommend LMWH beyond 6 months in patients who have ongoing or active cancer. This recommendation, based on expert consensus, has not been evaluated in a clinical study. OBJECTIVES: (1) To identify the most clinically and cost-effective length of anticoagulation with LMWH in the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT); (2) to identify practicalities of conducting a full randomised controlled trial (RCT) with regard to recruitment, retention and outcome measurement; and (3) to explore the barriers for progressing to a full RCT. DESIGN: The Anticoagulation with Low-molecular-weight heparin In the treatment of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis (ALICAT) trial is a randomised, multicentre, feasibility mixed-methods study with three components: (1) a RCT comparing ongoing LMWH treatment for CAT with cessation of LMWH at 6 months' treatment (current licensed practice) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic cancer, consulted in three clinical settings (haematology outpatients, oncology outpatients and primary care); (2) a nested qualitative study, including focus groups with clinicians to investigate attitudes for recruiting to the study and identify the challenges of progressing to a full RCT, and semistructured interviews with patients and relatives to explore their attitudes towards participating in the study, and potential barriers and concerns to participation; and (3) a UK-wide survey exercise to develop a classification and enumeration system for the CAT models and pathways of care. SETTING: A haematology outpatients department, an oncology outpatients department and primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with ongoing active or metastatic cancer who have received 6 months of LMWH for CAT. INTERVENTIONS: Ongoing LMWH treatment for CAT versus cessation of LMWH at 6 months' treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (i) The number of eligible patients over 12 months; (ii) the number of recruited patients over 12 months (target recruitment rate of 30% of eligible patients); and (iii) the proportion of randomised participants with recurrent venous thromboembolisms (VTEs) during follow-up. RESULTS: Following several delays in setting up the RCT component of the study, 5 out of 32 eligible patients consented to be randomised to the RCT suggesting progression to a full RCT was not feasible. Reasons for non-consenting were primarily based on a fixed preference for continuing or discontinuing treatment after 6 months of anticoagulation, and a fear of randomisation to their non-preferred option. Views were largely influenced by patients' initial experience of CAT. Focus groups with clinicians revealed that they would be reticent to recruit to such a study as they had fixed views of best management despite the lack of evidence. Patient pathway modelling suggested that there is a broad heterogeneity of practice with respect to CAT management and co-ordination, with no consensus on which specialty should best manage such cases. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the RCT reflect recruitment from the oncology site only and provide no recruitment data from haematology centres. However, it is unlikely that these other sites would have access to more eligible patients. The management of cancer-associated thrombosis beyond 6 months will remain a clinical challenge. As it is unlikely that a prospective study will successfully recruit, other strategies to accrue relevant data are necessary. Currently the LONGHEVA (Long-term treatment for cancer patients with deep-venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism) registry is in development to prospectively evaluate this important and common clinical scenario. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as clinical trials.gov number NCT01817257 and International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) 37913976. FUNDING DETAILS: Funding for the ALICAT trial was provided by the Health Technology Assessment programme (10/145/01) in response to a themed funding call. The study was designed in accordance with the initial funding brief and feedback from the review process.

Activated Protein C-Resistance Determination and Vascular Access Thrombosis in Populations with High Prevalence of Factor V Leiden.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Factor V Leiden heterozygosity occurs in 3-8% of the general European and US populations. Activated protein C resistance (APC-R)--a non-molecular laboratory test--can efficiently demonstrate the presence of this mutation and can be performed on most coagulation analyzers. On the other hand, fistula or graft thrombosis is a common and costly complication in hemodialysis patients. Our aim was to establish the value of APC-R determination in hemodialysis patients by assessing the risk of access thrombosis in patients with increased APC-R. METHODS: A total of 133 patients (81 men, mean age 64.5 ± 14.9 years and 52 women, mean age 63.6 ± 15 years) were selected. Participants were divided into 2 groups: those with access thrombosis (54 patients, 40.6%) and those with no access thrombosis (79 patients, 59.4%), and they were tested for the most common congenital or acquired thrombophilia risk factors. RESULTS: Overall, 12 patients (9%) had an increased APC-R and 10 of them had at least 1 episode of access thrombosis (83.3%). Univariate analysis to estimate crude odds ratio (OR) showed an OR of 8.8 (95% CI 1.8-41.8) times higher risk for access thrombosis in these patients. No significant differences were found after adjusting for age, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral arterial disease and malignancy. Sex was also a factor influencing thrombosis, presenting a higher OR for women (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.1-4.4). CONCLUSION: This study revealed a significant association between access thrombosis and increased APC-R in hemodialysis patients. This indicates that the determination of APC-R should be considered--especially, in populations with a high prevalence of Factor V Leiden--as proper anticoagulant therapy in these patients may reduce the risk of access thrombosis.

Thrombophilia testing in a tertiary paediatric hospital: Indications, outcomes and appropriateness.

AIM: The association between inherited thrombophilia and thrombotic disease in children is unclear. As a result, whether expensive thrombophilia tests are indicated in children is a contentious issue. This retrospective study aimed to assess the appropriateness of thrombophilia testing and the associated cost of inappropriate testing at a tertiary paediatric hospital. METHODS: We conducted a search for thrombophilia tests ordered at the Royal Children's Hospital between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2013. Using pathology and clinical records, we collected data relating to demographics, clinical data, indications, requesting departments and impact on patient management. RESULTS: Over the 3-year period, 3867 tests were ordered for 613 patients costing the hospital $102 579. Tests were most commonly ordered by gastroenterology on patients receiving liver transplants, by neurology as part of the stroke protocol, and by cardiology and cardiac surgery for patients anticoagulated on heparin infusions. Testing for thrombosis-related indications was relatively uncommon. Thrombophilia testing only directly affected management in one-third of patients. Overall, 70% of thrombophilia tests ordered were considered appropriate. However, some departments were found to have rates of inappropriate testing in excess of 50%. CONCLUSION: With improvements in thrombophilia testing practices at the Royal Children's Hospital AU$29 645.40 could be saved over 3 years. While there are improvements to be made in this area, in the overall context of the hospital's pathology testing budget, review of other areas such as inappropriate use of low-cost, high-volume tests may be of greater value in reducing the cost of pathology testing.

Economic repercussions of implementing a protocol for urgent surgical repair of thrombosed arteriovenous fistulae.

INTRODUCTION: When a patient undergoing haemodialysis suffers from arteriovenous fistula (AVF) thrombosis, (s)he needs an urgent procedure before the next dialysis session. Two different treatment options are available: placing a central venous catheter (CVC) or repairing the AVF. The objective of this study is to assess the possibility of urgent repair of thrombosed AVFs within the emergency care activity of a general surgery department and to determine the possible economic repercussions of implementing this working protocol in an area of healthcare. METHOD: We completed the prospective collection of all the urgent surgical interventions made to repair thrombosed AVFs for the period 2000-2011 at our centre. The clinical results were analysed using two variables: rate of thrombosis (episodes/patient/year) and percentage of recovery. Recovery was deemed effective if after the surgery the patient was able to undergo dialysis of his/her AVF without the need to place a CVC. The "thrombosed AVF" clinical process was defined and implemented, and its economic cost was analysed via a detailed analysis conducted by our centre's Financial Department. This analysis was also conducted for the alternative clinical process (new AVF), using the data published by the Ministry of Health (weight of the Diagnosis-Related Group: vascular accesses for haemodialysis, hospital complexity unit, public cost of outpatient procedures and percentage of economic repercussions of the implementation of this process, comparing the costs of both procedures). RESULTS: During the study period 268 episodes of thrombosis occurred, a rate of 0.1 episodes/patient/year (0.05 on autologous AVFs and 0.43 on grafts). 203 (75%) were treated urgently by the surgery department, of which 168 AVFs (82%) were recovered. The cost of urgently repairing an AVF was estimated at €999. The average cost of a scheduled AVF intervention, plus the cost of placing and maintaining a CVC, was estimated at €6,397. The saving made by urgent repair of AVFs in our area of healthcare is €107,940/year. Extrapolating this to the entire country for a population of 23,000 patients on haemodialysis, the total would be €9,930,480/year. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to perform urgent surgical recovery on the majority of AVFs for haemodialysis. Implementing multidisciplinary protocol avoids fitting these patients with catheters, reducing the cost this entails.

A feasibility study to inform the design of a randomized controlled trial to identify the most clinically and cost effective anticoagulation length with low molecular weight heparin in the treatment of cancer associated thrombosis (ALICAT): study protocol for a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism is common in patients with cancer and requires anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin. Current data informs anticoagulation as far as six months, yet guidelines recommend anticoagulation beyond six months in patients who have locally advanced or metastatic cancer. This recommendation, based on expert consensus, has not been evaluated in a clinical study. ALICAT (Anticoagulation Length in Cancer Associated Thrombosis) is a feasibility study to identify the most clinically and cost effective length of anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin in the treatment of cancer associated thrombosis. METHODS/DESIGN: ALICAT is a randomized multi-centre phase two mixed-methods study with three components: a randomized controlled trial, embedded qualitative study and a survey investigating pathways of care. The randomized controlled trial will compare ongoing low molecular weight heparin treatment for cancer-associated thrombosis versus cessation of low molecular weight heparin at six months treatment (current licensed practice) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic cancer. The embedded qualitative study will include focus groups with clinicians to investigate attitudes to recruiting to the study, identify the challenges of progressing to a full randomized controlled trial, and also semi-structured interviews with patients and relatives/carers to explore their attitudes towards participating in the study and potential barriers and concerns to participation. Finally, a UK wide survey exercise will be undertaken to develop a classification and enumeration system for the cancer associated thrombosis models and pathways of care. DISCUSSION: There is a lack of evidence determining the length of anticoagulation for patients with cancer associated thrombosis and subsequently treatment length varies. The ALICAT study will consider the feasibility of recruiting patients to a phase three trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN37913976.

Comparison of peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC) versus subcutaneously implanted port-chamber catheters by complication and cost for patients receiving chemotherapy for non-haematological malignancies.

PURPOSE: Indwelling central venous catheters (CVCs) have been increasingly used to enable delivery of intravenous chemotherapy. We aimed to compare the safety and cost of two commonly used CVCs, peripherally inserted central venous catheter (PICCs) and ports, in the delivery of chemotherapy in patients with non-haematological malignancies. METHODS: Seventy patients were randomly assigned to receive either a PICC or a port. The primary endpoint was occurrence of major complications, which required removal of the CVC and secondary endpoints included occurrence of any complications. RESULTS: Port devices were associated with fewer complications compared with PICC lines (hazard ratio of 0.25, CI, 0.09-0.86, P = 0.038). Major complication rate was lower in the port arm compared to the PICC arm (0.047 versus 0.193 major complications/100 catheter days, P = 0.034) with 6 versus 20 % of patients experiencing major complications, respectively. Thrombosis, the most common complication, was significantly higher in the PICC arm compared to the port arm (25 versus 0 %, P = 0.013). Quality of life and cost estimates did not differ significantly between the two arms. CONCLUSIONS: Port devices are associated with a lower risk of complications, with no difference in cost, compared to PICC lines in patients with non-haematological malignancies receiving intravenous chemotherapy.

Cost-effectiveness of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel for the prevention of atherothrombotic events in adult patients with acute coronary syndrome in Germany.

The aim of this health economic analysis was to compare the cost-effectiveness of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel within the German health care system. A two-part decision model was adapted to compare treatment with ticagrelor or clopidogrel in a low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) cohort (≤150 mg) for all ACS patients and subtypes NSTEMI/IA and STEMI. A decision-tree approach was chosen for the first year after initial hospitalization based on trial observations from a subgroup of the PLATO study. Subsequent years were estimated by a Markov model. Following a macro-costing approach, costs were based on official tariffs and published literature. Extensive sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the model. One-year treatment with ticagrelor is associated with an estimated 0.1796 life-years gained (LYG) and gained 0.1570 quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), respectively, over the lifetime horizon. Overall average cost with ticagrelor is estimated to be EUR 11,815 vs. EUR 11,387 with generic clopidogrel over a lifetime horizon. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was EUR 2,385 per LYG (EUR 2,728 per QALY). Comparing ticagrelor with Plavix(®) or the lowest priced generic clopidogrel, ICER ranges from dominant to EUR 3,118 per LYG (EUR 3,567 per QALY). These findings are robust under various additional sensitivity analyses. Hence, 12 months of ACS treatment using ticagrelor/ASA instead of clopidogrel/ASA may offer a cost-effective therapeutic option, even when the generic price for clopidogrel is employed.

Two-year vascular hospitalisation rates and associated costs in patients at risk of atherothrombosis in France and Germany: highest burden for peripheral arterial disease.

OBJECTIVES: To obtain Western European perspectives on the economic burden of atherothrombosis in patients with multiple risk factors only (MRF), cerebrovascular disease (CVD), coronary artery disease (CAD), and in the under-evaluated group of patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD), we examined vascular-related hospitalisation rates and associated costs in France and Germany. DESIGN: The prospective REACH Registry enrolled 4693 patients in France, and 5594 patients in Germany (from December 2003 until June 2004). METHODS: For each country, 2-year rates and costs associated with cardiovascular events and vascular-related hospitalisations were examined for patients with MRF, CVD, CAD, and PAD. RESULTS: Two-year hospitalisation costs were highest for patients with PAD (3182.1€ for France; 2724.4€ for Germany) and lowest for the MRF group (749.1€ for France; 503.3€ for Germany). Peripheral revascularizations and amputations were the greatest contributors to costs for all risk groups. Across all PAD subgroups, peripheral procedures constituted approximately half of the 2-year costs. CONCLUSION: Hospitalisation rates and costs associated with atherothrombotic disease in France and Germany are high, especially so for patients with PAD.

Cost analysis of Topical Negative Pressure (TNP) Therapy for traumatic acquired wounds.

Extended traumatic wounds require extended reconstructive operations and are accompanied by long hospitalizations and risks of infection, thrombosis and flap loss. In particular, the frequently used Topical Negative Pressure (TNP) Therapy is regarded as cost-intensive. The costs of TNP in the context of traumatic wounds is analyzed using the method of health economic evaluation. All patients (n=67: 45 male, 22 female; average age 54 y) with traumatically acquired wounds being treated with TNP at the university hospital of Goettingen in the period 01/01/2005-31/12/2007 comprise the basis for this analysis. The concept of activity-based costing based on clinical pathways according to InEK (National Institute for the Hospital Remuneration System) systematic calculations was chosen for cost accounting. In addition, a special module system adaptable for individual courses of disease was developed. The treated wounds were located on a lower extremity in 83.7% of cases (n=56) and on an upper extremity in 16.3% of cases (n=11). The average time of hospitalization of the patients was 54 days. Twenty-five patients (37.31%) exceeded the "maximum length of stay" of their associated DRG (Diagnosis Related Groups). The total PCCL (patient clinical complexity level = patient severity score) of 2.99 reflects the seriousness of disease. For the treatment of the 67 patients, total costs were $1,729,922.32 (1,249,176.91 euro). The cost calculation showed a financial deficit of $-210,932.50 (-152,314.36 euro). Within the entire treatment costs of $218,848.07 (158,030.19 euro), 12.65% per case were created by TNP with material costs of $102,528.74 (74,036 euro), representing 5.92% of entire costs. The cost of TNP per patient averaged $3,266.39 (2,358.66 euro). The main portion of the costs was not - as is often expected - due to high material costs of TNP but instead to long-term treatments. Because of their complexity, the cases are insufficiently represented in the lump-sum calculation of the InEK. A differentiated integration of complex TNP-treatment in the DRG system (e.g., as an expanded DRG I98Z) would be a step towards cost recovery. In addition, the refunding of outpatient TNP-treatment would lead to enhanced quality of life for the patients and to a reduction of hospital costs and length of stay.

Cost-effectiveness of the Endeavor stent in de novo native coronary artery lesions updated with contemporary data.

AIMS: The Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting coronary stent has been shown to reduce the restenosis rate compared to bare metal stents and has impacted other clinical measures such as mortality, acute myocardial infarctions (AMI) and target vessel revascularisation (TVR). METHODS AND RESULTS: Using pooled efficacy data from the Endeavor clinical trial programme, a model was developed to compare the cost effectiveness of the Endeavor drug eluting stent (DES) with the Driver bare meal stent (BMS) over a four year time period. Endeavor was more costly but had an improved clinical outcome compared to Driver BMS over four years with a 4% reduction in deaths, 33% reduction in AMI and a 45% reduction in TVR. Late stent thrombosis was the only event showing an increased incidence for Endeavor of 0.2% compared to 0% for Driver. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio was pound3,757/quality adjusted life years (QALY). CONCLUSIONS: Although much controversy has surrounded the appropriate way to assess the cost effectiveness of DES technology, a comprehensive analysis is presented and this suggests that by using extended clinical trial data out to four years, the Endeavor DES in particular, but DES technologies in general, are cost-effective approaches to percutaneous coronary intervention.

Outcome of the use of stent grafts to salvage failed arteriovenous accesses.

BACKGROUND: Since elements of the Dialysis Outcome Quality Initiative (K/DOQI) were implemented a decade ago, there has been a reduction in mortality for patients on hemodialysis. As patient longevity has increased, AV access site preservation by salvaging failed arteriovenous (AV) accesses has become increasingly important. However, efforts to salvage an AV access must be balanced against futile and expensive procedures. The Viabahn Endoprosthesis is a self-expandable stent graft (SG) that can be used to treat vein rupture or fibrotic lesions with significant elastic recoil following balloon angioplasty. The literature comprising the outcome of the use of SGs in salvaging failed AV accesses is limited. The purpose of this study is to determine the outcome of failed AV accesses treated with SGs and to identify patient or graft factors predictive of success. METHODS: The vascular access database and office, hospital, and dialysis unit records were retrospectively reviewed to identify all patients who underwent placement of an SG for the treatment of a thrombosed AV access between September 2004 and December 2007. Mean patient follow-up was 6 months. The K/DOQI goal for patency following a surgical intervention (6 months or later) was used to determine procedure success or failure. Kaplan-Meier life-table analysis was used to determine patency. Patient demographics and graft factors (location, diameter, length) were analyzed to identify predictors of success. RESULTS: Fifty-five SGs were placed in 48 patients (males, 29%; mean age, 61 years; diabetes mellitus, 47%) with a failed AV access. The indications were to treat significant elastic recoil or vein rupture following balloon angioplasty (47 patients) and to treat an AV graft seroma (1 patient). Cost for the VE ranged from $2337 to $3367 per patient. The procedure was deemed successful (patent at 6 months) in 29 + or - 7% of cases. Procedure success was not influenced by AV access location, endoprosthesis size (diameter or length), or patient demographic factors (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Use of the SG to salvage AV accesses falls short of the current K/DOQI clinical outcome goals for successful surgical intervention in the majority of cases. Given these results and the cost of the SG, its use is indicated in cases where AV access salvage will have an impact on long-term survival such as for patients in whom there are few options for new access placement. Further studies are needed to compare the SG to less costly options, such as angioplasty alone or angioplasty with the use of bare metal stents.