Suppr超能文献

血流导向装置治疗颅内动脉瘤后双重抗血小板治疗中血小板功能检测的成本效果分析。

Cost-effectiveness of platelet function testing in dual antiplatelet therapy decision-making after intracranial aneurysm treatment with flow diversion.

机构信息

Neurosurgical Service, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.

Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

出版信息

Neurosurg Rev. 2024 Aug 27;47(1):483. doi: 10.1007/s10143-024-02668-7.

Abstract

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) use is the standard of practice after flow diversion (FD) for intracranial aneurysms (IAs). Yet, no consensus exists in the literature regarding the optimal regimen. Certain institutions utilize various platelet function testing (PFT) to assess patient responsiveness to DAPT. Clopidogrel is the most commonly prescribed drug during DAPT; however, up to 52% of patients can be non-responders, justifying PFT use. Additionally, prices vary significantly among antiplatelet drugs, often further complicated by insurance restrictions. We aimed to determine the most cost-effective strategy for deciding DAPT regimens for patients after IA treatment. A decision tree with Monte Carlo simulations was performed to simulate patients undergoing various three-month postoperative DAPT regimens. Patients were either universally administered aspirin alongside clopidogrel, ticagrelor, or prasugrel without PFT, or administered one of the former thienopyridine medications based on platelet reactivity unit (PRU) results after clopidogrel. Input data for the model were extracted from the current literature, and the willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP) was defined as $100,000 per QALY as per standard practice in the US. The baseline comparison was with universal clopidogrel DAPT without any PFT. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of the model. Utilizing PFT and switching clopidogrel to prasugrel if resistance is documented was the most cost-effective regimen compared to universal clopidogrel, with a base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $-35,255 (cost $2,336.67, effectiveness 0.85). Performing PFT and switching clopidogrel to ticagrelor (ICER $-4,671; cost $2,995.06, effectiveness 0.84), universal prasugrel (ICER $5,553; cost $3,097.30, effectiveness 0.84), or universal ticagrelor (ICER $75,969; cost $3,801.36, effectiveness 0.84) were all more cost-effective than treating patients with universal clopidogrel (cost $3,041.77, effectiveness 0.83). These conclusions remain robust in probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses. The most cost-effective strategy guiding DAPT after FD for IAs is to perform PFTs and switch clopidogrel to prasugrel if resistance is documented, alongside aspirin. The cost of PFT is strongly justified and recommended when deciding patient-specific DAPT regimens.

摘要

双重抗血小板治疗 (DAPT) 是颅内动脉瘤 (IA) 血流导向装置 (FD) 后标准的治疗方法。然而,文献中尚未就最佳方案达成共识。某些机构使用各种血小板功能检测 (PFT) 来评估患者对 DAPT 的反应。氯吡格雷是 DAPT 中最常开的药物;然而,多达 52%的患者可能对其无反应,这证明了 PFT 的使用是合理的。此外,抗血小板药物的价格差异很大,而且经常受到保险限制的进一步复杂化。我们旨在确定决定 IA 治疗后患者 DAPT 方案的最具成本效益的策略。使用决策树和蒙特卡罗模拟来模拟接受各种三个月术后 DAPT 方案的患者。患者要么普遍接受阿司匹林联合氯吡格雷、替格瑞洛或普拉格雷,而不进行 PFT,要么根据氯吡格雷后的血小板反应单位 (PRU) 结果接受其中一种前噻吩吡啶药物。模型的输入数据从当前文献中提取,意愿支付阈值 (WTP) 定义为每 QALY 100,000 美元,这是美国的标准做法。基线比较是普遍使用氯吡格雷 DAPT,而不进行任何 PFT。进行概率和确定性敏感性分析以评估模型的稳健性。与普遍使用氯吡格雷相比,使用 PFT 并在记录到耐药性时将氯吡格雷换用普拉格雷是最具成本效益的方案,其基本案例增量成本效益比 (ICER) 为-35,255 美元(成本 2,336.67 美元,效果 0.85)。进行 PFT 并将氯吡格雷换用替格瑞洛(ICER -4,671 美元;成本 2,995.06 美元,效果 0.84)、普遍使用普拉格雷(ICER 5,553 美元;成本 3,097.30 美元,效果 0.84)或普遍使用替格瑞洛(ICER 75,969 美元;成本 3,801.36 美元,效果 0.84)均比治疗普遍使用氯吡格雷的患者更具成本效益(成本 3,041.77 美元,效果 0.83)。这些结论在概率和确定性敏感性分析中仍然稳健。指导 IA 后 FD 时 DAPT 的最具成本效益的策略是进行 PFT,如果记录到耐药性,则将氯吡格雷换用普拉格雷,同时使用阿司匹林。当决定患者特异性 DAPT 方案时,PFT 的成本具有很强的合理性,并建议使用。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验