Systematic review of hemostatic agents used in vascular surgery.

BACKGROUND: Hemostatic agents are routinely used in vascular surgery to complement proper suture techniques and decrease the risk of perioperative bleeding. A relative lack of comparative research studies have left surgeons with the option of choosing hemostatic agents based on their personal experience. The present review has highlighted the efficacy and safety of hemostatic agents and categorized them according to their primary mechanism of action and cost. METHODS: A systematic search strategy encompassing hemostatic agent products was deployed in the PubMed database. Single-center and multicenter, randomized, controlled trials with >10 patients were included in the present study. RESULTS: We reviewed 12 studies on the efficacy and safety of hemostatic agents compared with manual compression or other hemostatic agents. Using the time to hemostasis as the primary end point, all studies had found hemostatic agents to be significantly more efficient than manual compression. Likewise, adhesives (high pressure sealants) and dual agents (containing biologically active and absorbable components) were found to be more efficient, but costlier, than agents with either biologically active or absorbable components only. Agents with porcine or bovine constituents were found to trigger anaphylactic reactions in rare cases. Additionally, the absence of fibrin stabilizing factor XIII in a brand of fibrin sealant was speculated to reduce the affinity of the fibrin sealant for the expanded polytetrafluoroethylene graft. The cost of agents varied greatly depending on their active ingredient. CONCLUSIONS: Hemostatic agents appear to be highly effective at decreasing the risk of bleeding during surgical procedures. Although some hemostatic agents were demonstrated to achieve hemostasis faster than others, most are able to control bleeding within <10 minutes. Based on the limited data, the least expensive agents might suffice for limited suture lines used in routine procedures.

Clinical and economic impact of oxidized regenerated cellulose for surgeries in a Chinese tertiary care hospital.

Aim: To assess the impact of oxidized regenerated cellulose (ORC) on blood transfusion and hospital costs associated with surgeries. Patients & methods: This retrospective cohort study selected ten surgeries to create propensity-score matching groups to compare ORC versus nonORC (conventional hemostatic techniques such as manual pressure, ligature and electrocautery). Results: NonORC was associated with both higher blood transfusion volume and higher hospital costs than ORC in endoscopic transnasal sphenoidal surgery, nonskull base craniotomy, hepatectomy, cholangiotomy, gastrectomy and lumbar surgery. However, nonORC was associated with better outcomes than ORC in open colorectal surgery, mammectomy and hip arthroplasty surgery. Conclusion: When compared with conventional hemostatic technique, using ORC could impact blood transfusion and hospital costs differently by surgical settings.

Hemostatic agent use during partial nephrectomy: trends, outcomes, and associated costs.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the ability of hemostatic agents (HA) to limit bleeding complications following partial nephrectomy (PN) and determine HA usage and costs as well as factors associated with post-operative bleeding complications. METHODS: The records of 429 PN performed for kidney cancers were reviewed for clinical, pathologic, and perioperative variables. Surgical approach, HA use, and HA expenditure were determined. Bleeding complications and management to 90 days after PN were annotated. Wilcoxon rank-sum and two-sample t tests identified factors associated with HA use. Univariate and limited multivariate logistic regression determined variables associated with bleeding complications. RESULTS: Use of HA was associated with longer OR duration, longer ischemia time, higher EBL, and method of PN (OPN and LPN > RPN) (all p values < 0.001). On bivariate analysis, while multiple factors were associated with bleeding complications, neither HA use (p = 0.924) nor the number of HA used (two agents vs one p = 0.712; three agents vs. one p = 0.606) were. A multivariable model noted that increasing RENAL score (p = 0.013) and surgical approach (OPN vs. RPN [p = 0.009] and LPN vs. RPN (p = 0.002]) were independently associated with bleeding complications, while HA use was not (p = 0.294). During the 16 years of analysis, a total of $77,687 USD was spent on HA. Average annual HA expenditure was $4855 USD with the peak being in 2010 where expense was $14,086. Mean annual costs for HA use were greater for OPN vs RAPN starting in 2013 (p = 0.02) CONCLUSIONS: The use of HA during PN was not associated with lower rates of bleeding complications. Therefore, judicious use in a case-specific manner is requisite to limit potentially unnecessary operative cost.

Antithrombotic and hemostatic stewardship: evaluation of clinical outcomes and adverse events of recombinant factor VIIa (Novoseven®) utilization at a large academic medical center.

BACKGROUND: Recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) (Novoseven®) is utilized for the reversal of anticoagulation-associated bleeding and refractory bleeding in cardiac surgery. In August 2015, rFVIIa was transferred from the blood bank to the pharmacy at New York University (NYU) Langone Health. Concordantly, an off-label dosing guideline was developed. The objective of this study was to describe utilization and cost of rFVIIa and assess compliance to our dosing guideline. METHODS: We performed a retrospective, observational review of rFVIIa administrations post-implementation of an off-label dosing guideline. All patients who received rFVIIa between September 2015 and June 2017 were evaluated. For each rFVIIa administration, anticoagulation and laboratory values, indications for use, dosing, ordering and administration times, concomitant blood products, and adverse events were collected. Adverse events included venous thromboembolism, stroke, myocardial infarction, and death due to systemic embolism and mortality. The primary endpoint was the utilization of rFVIIa in accordance with the off-label dosing guideline. Secondary endpoints included hemostatic efficacy of rFVIIa, adverse events, blood products administered, and cost-effectiveness of rFVIIa transition to pharmacy. RESULTS: A total of 63 patients [pediatric (n = 6), adult (n = 57)] received rFVIIa, with the majority of use for refractory bleeding after cardiac surgery. The utilization of rVIIa decreased after development of the off-label dosing guideline and transition from blood bank to pharmacy. The total incidence of thromboembolic events within 30 days was 19.6%; 17.6% arterial and 2% venous; 70% of patients with an adverse event were over 70 years of age. Use of rFVIIa reduced the median number of units of blood products administered. CONCLUSION: Administration of rFVIIa for cardiac surgery appears to be effective for hemostasis. Transitioning rFVIIa from the blood bank to pharmacy and implementation of a dosing guideline appears to have reduced utilization. Patients receiving rFVIIa should be monitored for thromboembolic events. Elderly patients may be at higher risk for thromboembolic events.

Topical Hemostatic Agents in Gynecologic Surgery for Benign Indications.

Since a variety of procoagulant products, collectively called hemostatic agents, became available to surgeons in the mid-20th century, their use has increased across multiple specialties, including gynecology. Congruent with past research on the causes of regional variation in the practice of medicine, available evidence suggests that a central predictor for use of these products is physician preference rather than documented clinical necessity. Use of these products adds risks and avoidable cost. This article seeks to highlight specific gynecologic circumstances in which evidence and surgical judgment supports hemostatic agent use and other settings in which use should be reconsidered.

Gelatin-thrombin hemostatic matrix in neurosurgical procedures: hemostatic effectiveness and economic value of clinical and surgical procedure-related benefits.

BACKGROUND: Gelatin-thrombin hemostatic matrix (FloSeal®) use is associated with shorter surgical times and less blood loss, parameters that are highly valued in neurosurgical procedures. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of gelatin-thrombin in neurosurgical procedures and estimate its economic value. METHODS: In a 6-month retrospective evaluation at 2 hospitals, intraoperative and postoperative information were collected from patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures where bleeding was controlled with gelatin-thrombin matrix or according to local bleeding control guidelines (control group). Study endpoints were: length of surgery, estimated blood loss, hospitalization duration, blood units utilized, intensive care unit days, postoperative complications, and time to recovery. Statistical methods compared endpoints between the gelatin-thrombin and control groups and resource utilization costs were estimated. RESULTS: Seventy-eight patients (38 gelatin-thrombin; 40 control) were included. Gelatin-thrombin was associated with a shorter surgery duration than control (166±40 versus 185±55 minutes, P=0.0839); a lower estimated blood loss (185±80 versus 250±95 mL; P=0.0017); a shorter hospital stay (10±3 versus 13±3 days; P<0.001); fewer intensive care unit days (10 days/3 patients and 20 days/4 patients); and shorter time to recovery (3±2.2 versus 4±2.8 weeks; P=0.0861). Fewer gelatin-thrombin patients experienced postoperative complications (3 minor) than the control group (5 minor; 3 major). No gelatin-thrombin patient required blood transfusion; 5 units were administered in the control group. The cost of gelatin-thrombin (€ 268.40/unit) was offset by the shorter surgery duration (difference of 19 minutes at € 858/hour) and the economic value of improved the other endpoint outcomes (i.e., shorter hospital stay, lesser blood loss/lack of need for transfusion, fewer intensive care unit days, and complications). CONCLUSIONS: The use of gelatin-thrombin hemostatic matrix in patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures was associated with better intra- and postoperative parameters than conventional hemostasis methods, with these parameters having substantial economic benefits.

Over-the-scope clips are cost-effective in recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding.

Background: A recent prospective randomised controlled trial ('STING') showed superiority of over-the-scope clips compared to standard treatment in recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding. Cost-effectiveness studies on haemostasis with over-the-scope clips have not been reported so far. Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate whether the higher efficacy of the over-the-scope clips treatment outweighs the higher costs of the device compared to standard clips. Methods: For the analysis, the study population of the STING trial was used. Costs for the hospital stay in total as well as treatment-related costs were obtained. The average cost-effectiveness ratio, representing the mean costs per designated outcome, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, expressing the additional costs of a new treatment strategy per difference in outcome were calculated. The designated outcome was defined as successful haemostasis without rebleeding within seven days, which was the primary endpoint of the STING trial. Average cost-effectiveness ratio and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were calculated for total costs of the hospital stay as well as the haemostasis treatment alone. The cost-effectiveness analysis is taken from the perspective of the care provider.Results: Total costs and treatment-related costs per patient were 13,007.07 € in the standard group vs 12,808.56 € in the over-the-scope clip group (p = 0.812) and 2084.98 € vs 1984.71 € respectively (p = 0.663). The difference was not statistically significant. Total costs per successful haemostasis (average cost-effectiveness ratio) were 30,677.05 € vs 15,104.43 € and 4917.41 € vs 2340.46 € for the haemostasis treatment. The additional costs per successful haemostasis with over-the-scope clip treatment (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio) is -468.18 € for the whole treatment and -236.49€ for the haemostasis treatment. Conclusions: Over-the-scope clip treatment is cost-effective in recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding.

Impacto económico de los inhibidores en hemofilia tipo A pediátrica.

INTRODUCTION: Few studies have assessed the economic impact of inhibitors in hemophilia A in Mexico, especially in the pediatric population. OBJECTIVE: To determine the economic impact entailed by the development of inhibitors in pediatric patients with hemophilia A. METHOD: Patients with hemophilia A under the care of a pediatric hematology department between December 2015 and November 2017 were retrospectively assessed. Direct and indirect costs were determined based on the presence or absence of inhibitors. RESULTS: The cost analysis of the study population (n = 24) showed that diagnosis, follow-up, prophylaxis, treatment and hospitalization of these patients had an annual cost of $ 6 883 187.4 per patient, out of which more than 95 % depended on the use of hemostatic factors. Annual cost per patient in the group with inhibitors was $ 5 548 765.0 in comparison with $ 1 334 422.4 in the group without inhibitors, 4.2 times higher. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first national study to show that the presence of inhibitors in pediatric patients with hemophilia A increases the cost of the disease more than four times.

INTRODUCCIÓN: Pocos estudios han evaluado el impacto económico de los inhibidores en hemofilia tipo A en México, especialmente en población pediátrica. OBJETIVO: Determinar el impacto económico que conlleva el desarrollo de inhibidores en pacientes pediátricos con hemofilia tipo A. MÉTODO: Se evaluaron de forma retrospectiva los pacientes con hemofilia tipo A atendidos en un servicio de hematología pediátrica entre diciembre de 2015 y noviembre de 2017, y se determinaron los costos directos e indirectos a partir de la presencia o ausencia de inhibidores. RESULTADOS: El análisis de costos de la población estudiada (n = 24) mostró que el diagnóstico, seguimiento, profilaxis, tratamiento y hospitalización de estos pacientes tuvo un costo de $6 883 187.4 anuales por paciente, de los cuales más de 95 % dependió del uso de factores hemostáticos. El costo anual por paciente en el grupo con inhibidores tuvo un costo de $5 548 765.0, en comparación con $1 334 422.4 del grupo sin inhibidores, 4.2 veces superior. CONCLUSIONES: Se trata del primer estudio nacional que muestra que el desarrollo de inhibidores en pacientes pediátricos con hemofilia tipo A eleva más de cuatro veces la erogación económica derivada de esta enfermedad.

Impacto económico de los inhibidores en hemofilia tipo A pediátrica / Economic impact of inhibitors in pediatric hemophilia type A

Resumen Introducción: Pocos estudios han evaluado el impacto económico de los inhibidores en hemofilia tipo A en México, especialmente en población pediátrica. Objetivo: Determinar el impacto económico que conlleva el desarrollo de inhibidores en pacientes pediátricos con hemofilia tipo A. Método: Se evaluaron de forma retrospectiva los pacientes con hemofilia tipo A atendidos en un servicio de hematología pediátrica entre diciembre de 2015 y noviembre de 2017, y se determinaron los costos directos e indirectos a partir de la presencia o ausencia de inhibidores. Resultados: El análisis de costos de la población estudiada (n = 24) mostró que el diagnóstico, seguimiento, profilaxis, tratamiento y hospitalización de estos pacientes tuvo un costo de $6 883 187.4 anuales por paciente, de los cuales más de 95 % dependió del uso de factores hemostáticos. El costo anual por paciente en el grupo con inhibidores tuvo un costo de $5 548 765.0, en comparación con $1 334 422.4 del grupo sin inhibidores, 4.2 veces superior. Conclusiones: Se trata del primer estudio nacional que muestra que el desarrollo de inhibidores en pacientes pediátricos con hemofilia tipo A eleva más de cuatro veces la erogación económica derivada de esta enfermedad.

Abstract Introduction: Few studies have assessed the economic impact of inhibitors in hemophilia A in Mexico, especially in the pediatric population. Objective: To determine the economic impact entailed by the development of inhibitors in pediatric patients with hemophilia A. Method: Patients with hemophilia A under the care of a pediatric hematology department between December 2015 and November 2017 were retrospectively assessed. Direct and indirect costs were determined based on the presence or absence of inhibitors. Results: The cost analysis of the study population (n = 24) showed that diagnosis, follow-up, prophylaxis, treatment and hospitalization of these patients had an annual cost of $ 6 883 187.4 per patient, out of which more than 95 % depended on the use of hemostatic factors. Annual cost per patient in the group with inhibitors was $ 5 548 765.0 in comparison with $ 1 334 422.4 in the group without inhibitors, 4.2 times higher. Conclusions: This is the first national study to show that the presence of inhibitors in pediatric patients with hemophilia A increases the cost of the disease more than four times.

Comparison of the medical costs and effects of large traumatic eardrum perforations treatment.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the medical costs and effects of ofloxacin drops (OFLX), gelatin sponge patches, spontaneous healing, and endoscopic myringoplasty on healing in large tympanic membrane perforations (TMPs). METHODS: In total, 100 patients with large traumatic TMPs involving >50% of the eardrum were randomly assigned to OFLX, gelatin sponge, spontaneous healing, or endoscopic myringoplasty treatment groups. Medical costs, closure times, and closure rates were compared among groups at 6 months. RESULTS: The closure rates in the OFLX, gelatin sponge, spontaneous healing, and endoscopic myringoplasty groups were 95.7%, 82.6%, 58.3%, and 91.7%, respectively (P = 0.05). The mean closure time was 13.73 ±â€¯6.14 days in the OFLX group, 15.89 ±â€¯4.95 days in the gelatin sponge group, 48.36 ±â€¯10.37 days in the spontaneous healing group, and 12 days in the endoscopic myringoplasty group (P < 0.001). The mean medical costs in US dollars were $15.53 ±â€¯3.15, $103.64 ±â€¯111.58, $11.17 ±â€¯1.33, and $715.90 in the OFLX, gelatin sponge, spontaneous healing, and endoscopic myringoplasty groups, respectively (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Although the gelatin sponge and myringoplasty treatments significantly shortened the closure time compared with spontaneous healing, the gelatin sponge patch did not significantly improve the closure rate, and the medical cost of myringoplasty was significantly higher than that of the other treatments. In contrast, OFLX significantly shortened closure time and had a higher closure rate than spontaneous healing, and the medical costs were lower than those of the gelatin sponge and myringoplasty procedures.

Gelatin Paste as an Alternative Cost-Effective Hemostatic Agent in Cranial Surgery: Doing More with Less.

OBJECTIVE: To present an alternative cost-effective hemostatic agent (HA) for cranial surgery and to describe the technique to produce it. METHODS: This HA has been used in 3 reference centers over the last year during 230 procedures, including different types of pathology, such as skull base, oncology, vascular, and trauma, either for endoscopic or open approaches. This agent was made from a low-cost and worldwide-available gelatin foam which was mixed with saline solution in 2 syringes and connected by a 3-way stopcock, making a useful hemostatic paste. RESULTS: The cost was 16 and 28 times less than SURGIFLO and FLOSEAL, respectively. The mean time to prepare the mix was 4 minutes. It was very effective for venous and low-flow bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: The presented technique offers a reliable and cost-effective way of achieving hemostasis in cranial surgery, therefore allowing hospitals with limited resources to perform advanced procedures in a safer way.

Cost-consequence analysis of a hemostatic matrix alone or in combination for spine surgery patients.

BACKGROUND: A five-year retrospective database analysis comparing the use of Floseal 1 flowable topical hemostat alone (F) and in combination with gelatin/thrombin (F + G/T) to achieve hemostasis and control surgical bleeding showed higher resource utilization for F + G/T cases relative to F matched pairs during spinal surgery. Lower resource use in the F group was characterized by shorter hospital length of stay and surgical time as well as fewer blood transfusions and less hemostat agent used per surgery. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-consequence of using F compared to F + G/T in minor, major and severe spinal surgery from the US hospital perspective. METHODS: A cost-consequence model was developed using the US hospital perspective. Model inputs include clinical inputs from the literature, cost inputs (hemostatic matrices, blood product transfusion, hospital stay and operating room time) from the literature, and an analysis of annual spine surgery volume (minor, major and severe) using the 2012 National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. Costs are reported in 2017 US dollars. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses address sources of variability in the results. RESULTS: A medium-volume hospital (130 spine surgeries per year) using F versus F + G/T for spine surgeries is expected to require 85 less hours of surgical time, 58 fewer hospital days and 7 fewer blood transfusions in addition to hemostat volume savings (F: 1 mL, thrombin: 1994 mL). The cost savings associated with the hospital resources for a medium-volume hospital are expected to be $317,959 (surgical hours = $154,746, hospital days = $125,237, blood transfusions = $19,023, hemostatic agents = $18,953) or $2445 per spine surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The use of F versus F + G/T could lead to annual cost savings for US hospitals performing a low to high volume of spinal surgeries per year.

Treatment patterns and healthcare resource utilization and costs in heavy menstrual bleeding: a Japanese claims database analysis.

AIMS: Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is a highly prevalent condition, characterized by excessive menstrual blood loss and cramping, that interferes with activities of daily life. The aim of this study was to investigate treatment patterns in HMB in Japan, and to assess healthcare resource utilization and costs among women newly-diagnosed with the condition. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study retrospectively analyzed health insurance data available in the Japan Medical Data Center (JMDC) database on women aged 18-49 years who were newly-diagnosed with primary or secondary HMB. Treatment patterns were analyzed, and healthcare utilization and costs were evaluated and compared to matched controls. RESULTS: The study included a total of 635 patients, 210 with primary HMB and 425 with secondary HMB. In the primary HMB cohort, 60.0% of patients received one or more pharmacological or surgical treatments, compared with 76.2% in the secondary HMB cohort. The most commonly prescribed medications in all patients were hemostatic agents (28.7%), traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) (12.1%), and low-dose estrogen progestins (LEPs) (10.1%). After adjustment for patient baseline characteristics, healthcare costs were 1.93-times higher in primary HMB cases (p < .0001) and 4.44-times higher in secondary HMB cases (p < .0001) vs healthy controls. Outpatient care was the main cost driver. LIMITATIONS: The main limitations of this study are related to its retrospective nature, and the fact that only reimbursed medications were captured in the source database. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of HMB patients did not receive the recommended treatments. Healthcare costs were considerably increased in the presence of an HMB diagnosis.

Management of Persistent Epistaxis Using Floseal Hemostatic Matrix vs. traditional nasal packing: a prospective randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: Epistaxis is the most common emergent consultation to otolaryngology-head & neck surgery (OHNS) and with 60% of the population having experienced an episode and 1.6 in 10,000 requiring hospitalization in their lifetime. In preliminary studies Floseal® (Baxter, USA) Hemostatic Matrix has shown efficacy in up to 80% of persistent anterior epistaxis. We sought to evaluate the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of Floseal® (Baxter, USA) compared to traditional nasal packing for persistent epistaxis. METHODS: A prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted on all adult patients consulted to the OHNS service at the tertiary referral centers of the University of Alberta Hospital and Royal Alexandra Hospital for persistent epistaxis. Patients were randomized to the Floseal® (Baxter, USA) or traditional packing study arms. Our main clinical outcome measures were: 1) Hemostasis directly following treatment and at 48 h post-treatment, and 2) self-reported patient comfort at 48 h post-treatment. Further, trial data was used for a formal cost-effectiveness analysis to determine incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Univariate sensitivity analysis and uncertainty analysis were performed. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between groups for initial hemostasis (76.9% vs. 84.6%, p = 1.000) or, hemostasis at 48 h (76.9% vs. 69.2%, p = 1.000), requirement for admission (15.4% vs. 46.1%, p = 0.2016) or 30-day re-presentation rates (15.4% vs. 46.1%, p = 0.2016). Floseal® (Baxter, USA) was superior for decreased pain during placement (2.42 vs. 7.77, p = 0.0022), treatment (0.50 vs. 4.46, p = 0.0007) and removal (0 vs. 3.85, p = 0.0021). Floseal® (Baxter, USA) provides an average $1567.61 per patient savings from the single-payer system point of view and has an ICER of - $11,891 per re-bleed prevented (95% CI: -$37,658 to +$473). Uncertainty analysis shows that Floseal® has >90% chance of not only being cost-effective, but the dominant (preferred) treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Floseal® (Baxter, USA) was demonstrated to be an effective, comfortable and cost-effective alternative treatment of persistent epistaxis when compared to traditional packing methods for patients referred to OHNS with a normal coagulation profile. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration number: NCT02488135 . Date registered: June 26, 2015.

Economic evaluation of floseal compared to nasal packing for the management of anterior epistaxis.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Floseal, a topically applied hemostatic agent, and nasal packing for the management of epistaxis in Canada. STUDY DESIGN: Outcomes research, a cost-utility analysis. METHODS: We developed a Markov model to compare the costs and health outcomes of Floseal with nasal packing over a lifetime horizon from the perspective of a publicly funded healthcare system. A cycle length of 1 year was used. Efficacy of Floseal and packing was sought from the published literature. Unit costs were gathered from a hospital case costing system, whereas physician fees were extracted from the Ontario Schedule of Benefits for Physician Services. Results were expressed as an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. A series of one-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: From the perspective of a publicly funded health are system, the Floseal treatment strategy was associated with higher costs ($2,067) and greater QALYs (0.27) than nasal packing. Our findings were highly sensitive to discount rates, the cost of Floseal, and the cost of nasal packing. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that the probability that Floseal treatment is cost-effective reached 99% if the willingness-to-pay threshold was greater than $120,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Prior studies have demonstrated Floseal to be an effective treatment for anterior epistaxis. In the Canadian healthcare system, Floseal treatment appears to be a cost-effective treatment option compared to nasal packing for anterior epistaxis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2c Laryngoscope, 1778-1782, 2018.

Using Hemospray Improves the Cost-effectiveness Ratio in the Management of Upper Gastrointestinal Nonvariceal Bleeding.

GOALS: We compared the cost-effectiveness of traditional recommended endoscopic hemostatic therapies and Hemospray alone or in combination when treating nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB). BACKGROUND: Hemospray (TC-325) is a novel endoscopic hemostatic powder, achieving hemostasis through adherence to actively bleeding biological surfaces. STUDY: A decision tree of patients with NVUGIB assessed 4 possible treatment strategies: traditional therapy alone (T), Hemospray alone (H), traditional therapy completed by Hemospray if needed (T+H), or Hemospray completed by traditional therapy if needed (H+T). Using published probabilities, effectiveness was the likelihood of avoiding rebleeding over 30 days. Costs in 2014 US$ were based on the US National Inpatient Sample. A third-party payer perspective was adopted. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed. RESULTS: For all patients, T+H was more efficacious (97% avoiding rebleeding) and less expensive (average cost per patient of US$9150) than all other approaches. The second most cost-effective approach was H+T (5.57% less effective and US$635 more per patient). Sensitivity analyses showed T+H followed by a strategy of H+T remained more cost-effective than H or T alone when varying all probability assumptions across plausible ranges. Subgroup analysis showed that the inclusion of H (especially alone) was least adapted for ulcers and was more cost-effective when treating lesions at low risk of delayed rebleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Hemospray improves the effectiveness of traditional hemostasis, being less costly in most NVUGIB patient populations. A Hemospray first approach is most cost-effective for nonulcer bleeding lesions at low risk of delayed hemorrhage.

Comparison of 3-Factor Versus 4-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate With Regard to Warfarin Reversal, Blood Product Use, and Costs.

BACKGROUND: Prothrombin complex concentrates (PCCs) are drug products containing varying amounts of vitamin K-dependent coagulation factors II, VII, IX, and X. The evidence comparing 3-factor PCC (3-PCC) versus 4-factor PCC (4-PCC) for warfarin reversal is conflicting. It has been hypothesized that 3-PCC may be less effective than 4-PCC because of relatively lower factor VII content. STUDY QUESTION: The primary objective of this study was to compare international normalized ratio (INR) reversal between 3-PCC and 4-factor PCC (4-PCC) in warfarin-treated patients. The secondary objectives include comparing blood product use, total reversal costs, and cost-effectiveness between the groups. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted in 2 affiliated, academic institutions in the United States. Consecutive adult patients who received 3-PCC or 4-PCC for warfarin reversal were included. MEASURES AND OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was adequate INR reversal defined as a final INR ≤1.5. Secondary outcomes were the utilization of plasma, red blood cells and platelets, reversal costs, and the cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS: There were 89 patients who were included in the overall cohort (3-PCC = 57, 4-PCC = 32). Adequate INR reversal occurred less commonly with 3-PCC (45.6%) compared with 4-PCC (87.5%) (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients who received plasma (32% vs. 28%, P = 0.813), red blood cells (37% vs. 47%, P = 0.377), or platelets (16% vs. 28%, P = 0.180) between the 3-PCC and 4-PCC groups, respectively. The median reversal cost of 3-PCC ($3663) was lower than 4-PCC ($5105) (P = 0.001). The cost-effective ratio favored 4-PCC ($5105/87.5% = $5834) compared with 3-PCC ($3663/45.6% = $8033). CONCLUSIONS: Four-PCC was more effective than 3-PCC with regard to INR reversal in patients taking warfarin, but blood product use was similar. Although 4-PCC is associated with increased reversal costs, it may be cost-effective in terms of INR reversal.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a sealing hemostat patch (HEMOPATCH) vs standard of care in cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: A recent randomized controlled trial showed that patients undergoing ascending aorta surgery treated with HEMOPATCH to control bleeding had a significantly better hemostasis success rate than with dry or wet gauze compression or similar standard of care (SOC). OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost-effectiveness using two different agents for hemostasis (HEMOPATCH vs dry or wet gauze compression or similar SOC) in cardiac surgery from the European hospital perspective. METHODS: A literature-based cost-effectiveness model estimating average cost per successful hemostasis event was developed based on the hemostasis efficacy difference (HEMOPATCH = 97.6%, SOC = 65.8%, p < .001). Additional clinically significant end-points studied in the trial (blood transfusions and surgical revisions) were also analyzed. It was assumed that each surgery utilized two units of HEMOPATCH (dimensions of 4.5 × 9 cm) and two units of SOC. Product acquisition costs for HEMOPATCH and SOC were included along with outcome-related costs derived from the literature and inflation-adjusted to 2017 EUR and GBP. Results are presented for an average hospital with an annual case load of 574 cardiac surgeries. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Considering only product acquisition cost, HEMOPATCH had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €1,659, €1,519, €1,623, and £1,725 per hemostasis success when compared to SOC for Italy, Spain, France, and the UK, respectively. However, when considering the cost and potential difference in the frequency of transfusions and revisions compared to SOC, the use of HEMOPATCH was associated with an annual reduction of six revisions and 60 transfusions, improving the ICER to €1,440, €1,222, €1,461, and £1,592, respectively. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated model robustness. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis supports the use of HEMOPATCH over SOC in cardiac surgery in European hospitals to improve hemostasis success rates and potential cost offsets from reduced transfusions, complications, and surgical revisions.

Self-Made, Cost-Reducing Hemostatic Agent for Use in Spine Surgery.

Operative bleeding complications can lead to patient morbidity and mortality as well as longer and increased hospitalization costs. Matrix hemostatic sealants are used commonly to shorten the time to hemostasis, operative times, and the need for blood transfusion. Commercially available hemostatic powders are used in spine surgery because of their ability to conform to wounds and decrease bleeding in difficult-to-access surgical sites. Hospital costs for these agents are variable and are dependent on negotiated institutional contracted prices. We present our technique for mixing and use of our own hemostatic agent that has been used by our senior spine surgeons for more than a decade. It uses supplies that are commonly found in the hospital for a fraction of the cost and at different concentrations of thrombin. We hope that this report serves to assist surgeons working in hospitals with limited resources and enriches their armamentarium of hemostatic agents.

[Topical haemostatic agents in neurosurgery].

Haemostasis is of fundamental significance in neurosurgery, and insufficient control of bleeding is associated with morbidity and mortality. Topical haemostatic agents play an important role, as the characteristics of neuronal tissue limit the use of classical surgical haemostasis techniques. Appropriate choice of agent depends on the location and type of bleeding, but also on knowledge of the products' mechanisms of action, indications, price and accessibility. Biological products are superior to the mechanical in efficacy but require more preparation and are significantly more cost-intensive.