Summers Kelly M, Holdford David A, Crouch Michael A
School of Pharmacy, University of Maryland, Baltimore, USA.
Pharmacotherapy. 2006 May;26(5):609-18. doi: 10.1592/phco.26.5.609.
To perform a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing three treatment approaches during nonurgent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI): bivalirudin with provisional glycoprotein (GP) IIb-IIIa inhibitor therapy, unfractionated heparin (UFH) with eptifibatide, and UFH with abciximab.
Literature-based decision model from an institutional perspective.
Patient data from the Randomized Evaluation in PCI Linking Angiomax to Reduced Clinical Events (REPLACE)-2 study and three other randomized controlled trials that included UFH and routine GP IIb-IIIa inhibitor (eptifibatide or abciximab) therapy. All included studies were comparable based on patient population, procedural techniques, and general treatment approaches.
We included patient populations undergoing contemporary nonurgent PCI to identify probabilities of success or complications (myocardial infarction, urgent revascularization, thrombocytopenia, and major or minor bleeding at 30 days). Costs were assigned to each outcome by incorporating diagnosis-related group-- and/or Current Procedural Terminology--associated costs, institutional drug acquisition costs, and unit replacement costs of platelets and red blood cells. In the base-case analysis, the use of bivalirudin with provisional GP IIb-IIIa inhibitor therapy dominated the UFH and planned GP IIb-IIIa inhibitor approach: UFH with eptifibatide was 74 US dollars more expensive and 1.2% less effective, and UFH with abciximab was 777 US dollars more expensive and 2.3% less effective. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the model results were robust, but also revealed that bivalirudin lost its cost-effectiveness, resulting in UFH with eptifibatide becoming more cost-effective, when two or more vials of bivalirudin were necessary in greater than 27% of cases or when the use of provisional GP IIb-IIIa inhibitor therapy exceeded 20%.
This analysis indicates that bivalirudin with provisional GP IIb-IIIa inhibitor therapy is the most cost-effective antithrombotic treatment strategy in nonurgent PCI when its use and dosing are consistent with the REPLACE-2 trial.
进行一项成本效益分析,比较非紧急经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)期间的三种治疗方法:比伐卢定联合临时糖蛋白(GP)IIb-IIIa抑制剂治疗、普通肝素(UFH)联合依替巴肽以及UFH联合阿昔单抗。
基于机构视角的文献决策模型。
PCI中Angiomax与减少临床事件关联的随机评估(REPLACE)-2研究以及其他三项纳入UFH和常规GP IIb-IIIa抑制剂(依替巴肽或阿昔单抗)治疗的随机对照试验的患者数据。所有纳入研究在患者人群、手术技术和一般治疗方法方面具有可比性。
我们纳入了接受当代非紧急PCI的患者人群,以确定成功或并发症(心肌梗死、紧急血运重建、血小板减少以及30天时的大出血或小出血)的概率。通过纳入与诊断相关组和/或当前手术操作术语相关的成本、机构药物采购成本以及血小板和红细胞的单位置换成本,为每个结果分配成本。在基础病例分析中,比伐卢定联合临时GP IIb-IIIa抑制剂治疗优于UFH和计划的GP IIb-IIIa抑制剂治疗方法:UFH联合依替巴肽贵74美元且有效性低1.2%,UFH联合阿昔单抗贵777美元且有效性低2.3%。敏感性分析表明模型结果稳健,但也显示当超过27%的病例需要两剂或更多比伐卢定或临时GP IIb-IIIa抑制剂治疗的使用率超过20%时,比伐卢定失去其成本效益,导致UFH联合依替巴肽变得更具成本效益。
该分析表明,当比伐卢定的使用和剂量与REPLACE-2试验一致时,比伐卢定联合临时GP IIb-IIIa抑制剂治疗是非紧急PCI中最具成本效益的抗栓治疗策略。