Cost analysis of four major drug-eluting stents in diabetic populations.

AIM: To use an indirect comparisons approach and conduct a cost analysis comparing four drug-eluting stents (DES) from a United States (US) payer (i.e., fixed-fee reimbursement) perspective. METHODS AND RESULTS: Studies were chosen that randomised two or more DES in diabetic patients. A one-year target lesion revascularisation (TLR) risk for Taxus was first derived. Risk Ratios (RRs) for each DES versus Taxus were calculated through meta-analyses. The RRs were multiplied by the average TLR risk for Taxus to estimate DES TLR risks. Estimates were added to a budget-impact model, along with utilisation and reimbursement rates for diagnosis-related groups. Budgets were calculated, assuming 100% stent use and 200,000 diabetic beneficiaries. One-year TLR risks were estimated to be 3.2%, 7.1%, 6.9% and 7.9% for Cypher, Endeavor, Taxus and Xience respectively. By substituting Cypher for DES with higher TLR, results predicted annual cost-savings greater than $146 million per population ($ 733 per patient). Results were comparable when assuming no difference in TLR risk between Endeavor, Taxus and Xience. CONCLUSIONS: When outcomes from trials of diabetic populations are analysed and used in a budget-impact model from a US payer perspective, the use of Cypher is associated with lower TLR rates, which translates into large potential cost savings.

Colonic stents: the modern treatment of colonic obstruction.

Colonic stents traditionally have been used for the management of colorectal cancer, either as a palliative treatment or as a bridge to surgery. More recently, colonic stents have also been advocated as part of the therapy of benign strictures. A number of colonic stents are available worldwide, four of which are made in the USA. These stents are classified as covered or uncovered, with similar clinical applications. Technical and clinical success rates are similar among these different stents, as well as the rate of complications, which mainly consist of obstruction and migration. The deployment systems utilize fluoroscopy, endoscopy, or both. More recently, stents became available that are deployed "through the scope" (TTS) making the procedure faster. However, this advance does not exclude the use of fluoroscopy, particularly in those cases where the direct visualization of the proximal end of the stricture is absent. The increasing experience in the management of colorectal cancer with colonic stents decreases the morbidity and mortality, as well as cost, in comparison with surgical intervention for acute colonic obstruction. Management with colonic stents can also rule out proximal synchronous lesions after initial decompression prior to definitive surgery. Benign conditions may also be treated with stents. A multidisciplinary approach for the use of colonic stents during assessment and management of acute colonic obstruction is necessary in order to achieve a satisfactory outcome, whether that be better quality of life or improved survival.