Elina Pliakos, Lauren Glassmoyer, Taisei Kobayashi, Steven Pugliese, Hari Shankar, William Matthai, Sameer Khandhar, Jay Giri, Ashwin Nathan
{"title":"导管定向溶栓治疗中危肺栓塞的经济学分析。","authors":"Elina Pliakos, Lauren Glassmoyer, Taisei Kobayashi, Steven Pugliese, Hari Shankar, William Matthai, Sameer Khandhar, Jay Giri, Ashwin Nathan","doi":"10.1002/ccd.31280","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pulmonary embolism is associated with a significant burden of morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. Catheter-directed thrombolysis has emerged as a promising option for patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism which aims to improve outcomes over standard anticoagulation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We constructed a decision-analytic model comparing the cost-effectiveness of catheter-directed thrombolysis to anticoagulation alone for the management of intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism. Cost-effectiveness was determined by calculating deaths averted and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Uncertainty was addressed by plotting cost-effectiveness planes and acceptability curves for various willingness-to-pay thresholds. The main outcome was ICER (US dollars/deaths averted).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the base case analysis, derived using systemic lysis data, the cost associated with catheter-directed thrombolysis was estimated at $22,353 with a probability of survival at 1 month of 0.984. For the anticoagulation alone strategy, the cost was $25,060, and the probability of survival at 1 month was 0.958. Overall, catheter-directed thrombolysis resulted in savings of $104,089 per death averted (ICER,-$104,089 per death averted). Sensitivity analysis revealed that catheter-directed thrombolysis would no longer be cost-effective when its associated mortality is greater than 0.042. In the probabilistic analysis, at a willingness-to-pay of $100,000, catheter-directed thrombolysis had a 63% chance of being cost-effective, and in cost-effectiveness acceptability curves, it was cost-effective in 63%-78% of simulations for a willingness to pay ranging from $0 to $100,000.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>If the assumptions made in our model are shown to be accurate then CDT would be cost-effective and may lead to considerable cost savings if used where clinically appropriate.</p>","PeriodicalId":9650,"journal":{"name":"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Economic Analysis of Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis for Intermediate-Risk Pulmonary Embolism.\",\"authors\":\"Elina Pliakos, Lauren Glassmoyer, Taisei Kobayashi, Steven Pugliese, Hari Shankar, William Matthai, Sameer Khandhar, Jay Giri, Ashwin Nathan\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ccd.31280\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pulmonary embolism is associated with a significant burden of morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. Catheter-directed thrombolysis has emerged as a promising option for patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism which aims to improve outcomes over standard anticoagulation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We constructed a decision-analytic model comparing the cost-effectiveness of catheter-directed thrombolysis to anticoagulation alone for the management of intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism. Cost-effectiveness was determined by calculating deaths averted and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Uncertainty was addressed by plotting cost-effectiveness planes and acceptability curves for various willingness-to-pay thresholds. The main outcome was ICER (US dollars/deaths averted).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the base case analysis, derived using systemic lysis data, the cost associated with catheter-directed thrombolysis was estimated at $22,353 with a probability of survival at 1 month of 0.984. For the anticoagulation alone strategy, the cost was $25,060, and the probability of survival at 1 month was 0.958. Overall, catheter-directed thrombolysis resulted in savings of $104,089 per death averted (ICER,-$104,089 per death averted). Sensitivity analysis revealed that catheter-directed thrombolysis would no longer be cost-effective when its associated mortality is greater than 0.042. In the probabilistic analysis, at a willingness-to-pay of $100,000, catheter-directed thrombolysis had a 63% chance of being cost-effective, and in cost-effectiveness acceptability curves, it was cost-effective in 63%-78% of simulations for a willingness to pay ranging from $0 to $100,000.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>If the assumptions made in our model are shown to be accurate then CDT would be cost-effective and may lead to considerable cost savings if used where clinically appropriate.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9650,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.31280\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.31280","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Economic Analysis of Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis for Intermediate-Risk Pulmonary Embolism.
Background: Pulmonary embolism is associated with a significant burden of morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. Catheter-directed thrombolysis has emerged as a promising option for patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism which aims to improve outcomes over standard anticoagulation.
Methods: We constructed a decision-analytic model comparing the cost-effectiveness of catheter-directed thrombolysis to anticoagulation alone for the management of intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism. Cost-effectiveness was determined by calculating deaths averted and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Uncertainty was addressed by plotting cost-effectiveness planes and acceptability curves for various willingness-to-pay thresholds. The main outcome was ICER (US dollars/deaths averted).
Results: In the base case analysis, derived using systemic lysis data, the cost associated with catheter-directed thrombolysis was estimated at $22,353 with a probability of survival at 1 month of 0.984. For the anticoagulation alone strategy, the cost was $25,060, and the probability of survival at 1 month was 0.958. Overall, catheter-directed thrombolysis resulted in savings of $104,089 per death averted (ICER,-$104,089 per death averted). Sensitivity analysis revealed that catheter-directed thrombolysis would no longer be cost-effective when its associated mortality is greater than 0.042. In the probabilistic analysis, at a willingness-to-pay of $100,000, catheter-directed thrombolysis had a 63% chance of being cost-effective, and in cost-effectiveness acceptability curves, it was cost-effective in 63%-78% of simulations for a willingness to pay ranging from $0 to $100,000.
Conclusions: If the assumptions made in our model are shown to be accurate then CDT would be cost-effective and may lead to considerable cost savings if used where clinically appropriate.
期刊介绍:
Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions is an international journal covering the broad field of cardiovascular diseases. Subject material includes basic and clinical information that is derived from or related to invasive and interventional coronary or peripheral vascular techniques. The journal focuses on material that will be of immediate practical value to physicians providing patient care in the clinical laboratory setting. To accomplish this, the journal publishes Preliminary Reports and Work In Progress articles that complement the traditional Original Studies, Case Reports, and Comprehensive Reviews. Perspective and insight concerning controversial subjects and evolving technologies are provided regularly through Editorial Commentaries furnished by members of the Editorial Board and other experts. Articles are subject to double-blind peer review and complete editorial evaluation prior to any decision regarding acceptability.