Golan Yoav, Wolf Michael P, Pauker Stephen G, Wong John B, Hadley Susan
Division of Geographic Medicine and Infectious Diseases, Tufts-New England Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts 02111, USA.
Ann Intern Med. 2005 Dec 20;143(12):857-69. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-143-12-200512200-00004.
Mortality from invasive candidiasis is high. Low culture sensitivity and treatment delay contribute to increased mortality, but nonselective early therapy may result in excess costs and drug resistance.
To determine the cost-effectiveness of anti-Candida strategies for high-risk patients in the intensive care unit (ICU).
Cost-effectiveness decision model.
Published data to 10 May 2005, identified from MEDLINE and Cochrane Library searches, ICU databases, expert estimates, and actual hospital costs.
Patients in the ICU with suspected infection who have not responded to antibacterial therapy.
Lifetime.
Societal.
Fluconazole, caspofungin, amphotericin B, or lipid formulation of amphotericin B given as either empirical or culture-based therapy and no anti-Candida therapy.
Incremental life expectancy and incremental cost per discounted life-year (DLY) saved.
RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Ten percent of the target population will have invasive candidiasis. Empirical caspofungin therapy is the most effective strategy but is expensive (295,115 dollars per DLY saved). Empirical fluconazole therapy is the most reasonable strategy (12,593 dollars per DLY saved) and decreases mortality from 44.0% to 30.4% in patients with invasive candidiasis and from 22.4% to 21.0% in the overall target cohort.
Empirical fluconazole therapy is reasonable for likelihoods of invasive candidiasis greater than 2.5% or fluconazole resistance less than 24.0%. For higher resistance levels, empirical caspofungin therapy is preferred. For low prevalences of invasive candidiasis, culture-based fluconazole is reasonable. For prevalences exceeding 60%, empirical caspofungin therapy is reasonable. For caspofungin to be reasonable at a prevalence of 10%, its cost must be reduced by 58%.
Less severe illness and limited use of broad-spectrum antimicrobial agents, typical of smaller hospitals, could result in a lower risk for invasive candidiasis.
In patients in the ICU with suspected infection who have not responded to antibiotic treatment, empirical fluconazole should reduce mortality at an acceptable cost. The use of empirical strategies in low-risk patients is not justified.
侵袭性念珠菌病的死亡率很高。培养敏感性低和治疗延迟导致死亡率增加,但非选择性的早期治疗可能会导致成本过高和耐药性。
确定重症监护病房(ICU)高危患者抗念珠菌策略的成本效益。
成本效益决策模型。
截至2005年5月10日的已发表数据,通过MEDLINE和Cochrane图书馆检索、ICU数据库、专家估计以及实际医院成本确定。
ICU中疑似感染且对抗菌治疗无反应的患者。
终身。
社会视角。
氟康唑、卡泊芬净、两性霉素B或两性霉素B脂质体,作为经验性治疗或基于培养结果的治疗,以及不进行抗念珠菌治疗。
增加的预期寿命和每挽救一个贴现生命年(DLY)的增量成本。
目标人群中有10%会发生侵袭性念珠菌病。经验性使用卡泊芬净治疗是最有效的策略,但成本高昂(每挽救一个DLY需295,115美元)。经验性使用氟康唑治疗是最合理的策略(每挽救一个DLY需12,593美元),可使侵袭性念珠菌病患者的死亡率从44.0%降至30.4%,使整个目标队列的死亡率从22.4%降至21.0%。
对于侵袭性念珠菌病可能性大于2.5%或氟康唑耐药率小于24.0%的情况,经验性使用氟康唑治疗是合理的。对于耐药水平较高的情况,经验性使用卡泊芬净治疗更可取。对于侵袭性念珠菌病患病率较低的情况,基于培养结果使用氟康唑是合理