Legrand Guillaume, Ruscio Laura, Benhamou Dan, Pelletier-Fleury Nathalie
Department of Urology and Transplantation, Saint-Louis Hospital, Paris, France; Center of Research, Medicine, Sciences, Mental Health, Society (CERMES 3), Villejuif, France.
Department of Anesthesia and Reanimation, Bicêtre Hospital, Le Kremlin Bicêtre, France.
Value Health. 2015 Jul;18(5):605-13. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2015.04.005. Epub 2015 Jun 10.
Several minimally invasive techniques for cardiac output monitoring such as the esophageal Doppler (ED) and arterial pulse pressure waveform analysis (APPWA) have been shown to improve surgical outcomes compared with conventional clinical assessment (CCA).
To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of these techniques in high-risk abdominal surgery from the perspective of the French public health insurance fund.
An analytical decision model was constructed to compare the cost-effectiveness of ED, APPWA, and CCA. Effectiveness data were defined from meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials. The clinical end points were avoidance of hospital mortality and avoidance of major complications. Hospital costs were estimated by the cost of corresponding diagnosis-related groups.
Both goal-directed therapy strategies evaluated were more effective and less costly than CCA. Perioperative mortality and the rate of major complications were reduced by the use of ED and APPWA. Cost reduction was mainly due to the decrease in the rate of major complications. APPWA was dominant compared with ED in 71.6% and 27.6% and dominated in 23.8% and 20.8% of the cases when the end point considered was "major complications avoided" and "death avoided," respectively. Regarding cost per death avoided, APPWA was more likely to be cost-effective than ED in a wide range of willingness to pay.
Cardiac output monitoring during high-risk abdominal surgery is cost-effective and is associated with a reduced rate of hospital mortality and major complications, whatever the device used. The two devices evaluated had negligible costs compared with the observed reduction in hospital costs. Our comparative studies suggest a larger effect with APPWA that needs to be confirmed by further studies.
与传统临床评估(CCA)相比,几种用于心输出量监测的微创技术,如食管多普勒(ED)和动脉脉搏压力波形分析(APPWA),已被证明可改善手术结局。
从法国公共医疗保险基金的角度评估这些技术在高危腹部手术中的成本效益。
构建一个分析性决策模型,以比较ED、APPWA和CCA的成本效益。有效性数据来自随机临床试验的荟萃分析。临床终点为避免医院死亡和避免重大并发症。医院成本通过相应诊断相关组的成本进行估算。
所评估的两种目标导向治疗策略均比CCA更有效且成本更低。使用ED和APPWA可降低围手术期死亡率和重大并发症发生率。成本降低主要归因于重大并发症发生率的下降。当考虑的终点分别为“避免重大并发症”和“避免死亡”时,APPWA在71.6%和27.6%的病例中相对于ED占主导地位,在23.8%和20.8%的病例中被ED主导。关于每避免一例死亡的成本,在广泛的支付意愿范围内,APPWA比ED更有可能具有成本效益。
在高危腹部手术期间进行心输出量监测具有成本效益,且与降低医院死亡率和重大并发症发生率相关,无论使用何种设备。与观察到的医院成本降低相比,所评估的两种设备的成本可忽略不计。我们的比较研究表明APPWA的效果更大,但需要进一步研究予以证实。