Hospital Medicine Unit, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts 02118, USA.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(7):521-38. doi: 10.2165/11535210-000000000-00000.
Total hip and knee replacements (THR and TKR) are high-risk settings for venous thromboembolism (VTE). This review summarizes the cost effectiveness of VTE prophylaxis regimens for THR and TKR. We searched MEDLINE (January 1997 to October 2009), EMBASE (January 1997 to June 2009) and the UK NHS Economic Evaluation Database (1997 to October 2009). We analysed recent cost-effectiveness studies examining five categories of comparisons: (i) anticoagulants (warfarin, low-molecular-weight heparin [LMWH] or fondaparinux) versus acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin); (ii) LMWH versus warfarin; (iii) fondaparinux versus LMWH; (iv) comparisons with new oral anticoagulants; and (v) extended-duration (> or =3 weeks) versus short-duration (<3 weeks) prophylaxis. We abstracted information on cost and effectiveness for each prophylaxis regimen in order to calculate an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Because of variations in effectiveness units reported and horizon length analysed, we calculated two cost-effectiveness ratios, one for the number of symptomatic VTE events avoided at 90 days and the other for QALYs at the 1-year mark or beyond. Our search identified 33 studies with 67 comparisons. After standardization, comparisons between LMWH and warfarin were inconclusive, whereas fondaparinux dominated LMWH in nearly every comparison. The latter results were derived from radiographic VTE rates. Extended-duration prophylaxis after THR was generally cost effective. Small numbers prohibit conclusions about aspirin, new oral anticoagulants or extended-duration prophylaxis after TKR. Fondaparinux after both THR and TKR and extended-duration LMWH after THR appear to be cost-effective prophylaxis regimens. Small numbers for other comparisons and absence of trials reporting symptomatic endpoints prohibit comprehensive conclusions.
全髋关节和膝关节置换术(THR 和 TKR)是静脉血栓栓塞症(VTE)的高风险环境。本综述总结了 THR 和 TKR 的 VTE 预防方案的成本效益。我们检索了 MEDLINE(1997 年 1 月至 2009 年 10 月)、EMBASE(1997 年 1 月至 2009 年 6 月)和英国 NHS 经济评价数据库(1997 年 10 月至 2009 年 10 月)。我们分析了最近的成本效益研究,考察了五类比较:(i)抗凝剂(华法林、低分子肝素[LMWH]或磺达肝素)与乙酰水杨酸(阿司匹林);(ii)LMWH 与华法林;(iii)磺达肝素与 LMWH;(iv)与新型口服抗凝剂的比较;(v)延长疗程(>或=3 周)与短疗程(<3 周)预防。我们提取了每种预防方案的成本和效果信息,以计算增量成本效益比。由于报告的有效性单位和分析的时间长度不同,我们计算了两种成本效益比,一种是 90 天内避免症状性 VTE 事件的数量,另一种是 1 年或更长时间的 QALYs。我们的搜索确定了 33 项研究,其中 67 项进行了比较。经过标准化,LMWH 与华法林之间的比较没有定论,而磺达肝素在几乎所有比较中均优于 LMWH。后者的结果来自于放射性 VTE 率。THR 后延长疗程的预防通常具有成本效益。TKR 后阿司匹林、新型口服抗凝剂或延长疗程预防的小数量数限制了结论的得出。THR 后磺达肝素和 THR 后 LMWH 延长疗程似乎是具有成本效益的预防方案。其他比较的数量较少,且没有报告症状终点的试验,因此无法得出全面的结论。