Multicenter study of parenteral nutrition in non-critically ill elderly patients compared to younger patients - Study IAIOS-PN (Incidence and Assessment of Iatrogenesis in Older Subjects receiving Parenteral Nutrition).

OBJECTIVE: this study assessed the incidence of hyperglycemia, hypertriglyceridemia, and liver function test (LFT) alterations among patients older and younger than 65 years receiving parenteral nutrition (PN). A secondary objective was to compare the incidence of any of these three events. MATERIAL AND METHODS: inclusion criteria were non-critically ill adult inpatients receiving PN for ≥ 7 days in 15 hospitals in Spain. Exclusion criteria were hyperglycemia, hypertriglyceridemia, LFT alterations, sepsis, shock, pancreatic/hepatobiliary surgery, renal failure, diabetes mellitus (DM) type 1, insulin-treated DM type 2, acute DM complications, or obesity prior to PN. Patients were classified into groups YOUNG (aged 35-64) and OLD (aged 65-95). RESULTS: this study recruited 200 patients. Group YOUNG included 63 (31.5%) patients and OLD, 137 (68.5%). Hyperglycemia appeared in 37 (18.5%) patients, eight (12.7%) in group YOUNG and 29 (21.2%) in group OLD (p = 0.174). Hypertriglyceridemia appeared in only one (0.7%) patient. LFT alterations appeared in 141 (70.5%) patients, 44 (69.8%) in group YOUNG and 97 (70.8%) in group OLD (p = 1.000). The model for hyperglycemia included DM type 2, previous surgical procedure, and use of hyperglycemia-inducing medications. The model for LFT alteration included previous surgical procedure, amount of lipids and amino acids, medications causing LFT alterations and a trend for age group. The model for any event included surgical procedure, DM type 2, and medications causing alterations. CONCLUSION: patients of ≥ 65 years receiving PN had similar incidences of hyperglycemia, hypertriglyceridemia, and LFT alterations as younger patients. Additionally, older patients had trends toward lower LFT alterations.

[Estimation of hospital costs of colorectal cancer in Catalonia (Spain)]. / Estimación del coste hospitalario del cáncer colorrectal en Cataluña.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the hospital cost associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment by stage at diagnosis, type of cost and disease phase in a public hospital. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of the hospital costs associated with a cohort of 699 patients diagnosed with CRC and treated for this disease between 2000 and 2006 in a teaching hospital and who had a 5-year follow-up from the time of diagnosis. Data were collected from clinical-administrative databases. Mean costs per patient were analysed by stage at diagnosis, cost type and disease phase. RESULTS: The mean cost per patient ranged from 6,573 Euros for patients with a diagnosis of CRC in situ to 36,894 € in those diagnosed in stage III. The main cost components were surgery-inpatient care (59.2%) and chemotherapy (19.4%). Advanced disease stages were associated with a decrease in the relative weight of surgical and inpatient care costs and an increase in chemotherapy costs. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the costs of CRC treatment based on clinical practice, with chemotherapy and surgery accounting for the major cost components. This cost analysis is a baseline study that will provide a useful source of information for future studies on cost-effectiveness and on the budget impact of different therapeutic innovations in Spain.

Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of linezolid versus teicoplanin in bacteremia by Gram-positive microorganisms.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the efficiency of linezolid versus teicoplanin in the treatment of bacteremia produced by Gram-positive microorganisms through a pharmacoeconomic analysis based on clinical results obtained from a previous clinical trial. METHODS: We applied an analysis of cost-effectiveness elaborated through a pharmacoeconomic model. We defined each unit of effectiveness as 'each successfully cured of infections with bacteremia.' We used the program Pharma-Decision (version Hospital 1.1) that allows to build interactive pharmacoeconomic models. Effectiveness data of both antibiotics were obtained from a published clinical trial, while resources consumed were obtained from the same source and from a consensus provided by a local expert panel. Only direct costs were included in the analysis without taking into consideration indirect costs. The perspective chosen was hospital assistance and the time horizon was set to 28 days. All costs are expressed in Euros. RESULTS: Linezolid demonstrated a better clinical outcome with less associated costs compared to teicoplanin (88.5 versus 56.7% of cured patients and 5,557.04 versus 6,327.43 per treated patient, respectively), thus resulting in a lower cost-effectiveness ratio for linezolid versus teicoplanin (6,279.1 versus 11,159.5 per cured patient with a 95% CI of 5,960.2-6,510.4 and 10,865.2-12,647.3, respectively) which results in a the dominant position for linezolid. The sensitivity analysis showed that linezolid was always the most efficient option even when modifying the value of variables with higher uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: Linezolid is a more efficient option than teicoplanin because it presents higher rate of effectiveness with lower consumption of resources, thus being a dominant alternative in the treatment of Gram-positive infection with bacteremia.