Stroke · 2025
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Early Minimally Invasive Removal of Intracerebral Hemorrhage.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hanmer Janel, Arnold Jonathan, Hall Alex, Ratcliff Jonathan J, Allen Jason W, Frankel Michael, Wright David W, Barrow Daniel L, Pradilla Gustavo, Smith Kenneth J, ENRICH Trial Investigators
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is common and often devastating. In a randomized controlled trial, ICH evacuation with minimally invasive trans-sulcal parafascicular surgery (MIPS) improved functional outcomes at 180 days compared with medical management (MM), primarily in patients with lobar hemorrhages. The cost-effectiveness of MIPS compared with MM is explored.
METHODS: A Markov model compared costs and outcomes using ENRICH trial (Early Minimally Invasive Removal of Intracerebral Hemorrhage) data for MIPS versus MM over the 6-month trial duration. Costs were 2020 US$ and effectiveness was quality-adjusted life years. Monthly model transitions between modified Rankin Scale score health states were estimated from trial data. Costs were obtained from US databases and literature. MIPS device costs were $5705/patient. Primary outcomes were total hospital costs from the hospital perspective and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio between MIPS and MM (ie, the 6-month cost difference between strategies divided by quality-adjusted life year difference) from the healthcare perspective for patients with lobar ICH. Sensitivity analyses were performed.
RESULTS: From the hospital perspective, MIPS costs were $2782 less per patient than MM ($74 252 versus $77 034), with MIPS having decreased the intensive care unit hospital length of stay, non-MIPS neurosurgery, mortality, and rehospitalization. From the healthcare perspective, including hospital and nonhospital costs, MIPS in lobar ICH cost $8850 less and gained 0.068 quality-adjusted life year per patient compared with MM; thus MIPS was dominant (less costly and more effective). Results were robust to individual parameter variation over plausible ranges and, with all parameters varied simultaneously in a probabilistic sensitivity analysis, MIPS was dominant in >93% of 10 000 model iterations and favored in >99% at $100 000/quality-adjusted life year gained (a common US benchmark).
CONCLUSIONS: In the ENRICH randomized controlled trial, MIPS cost less and was more effective compared with MM from both hospital and healthcare perspectives for patients with lobar ICH.
REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/; Unique identifier: NCT02880878.
METHODS: A Markov model compared costs and outcomes using ENRICH trial (Early Minimally Invasive Removal of Intracerebral Hemorrhage) data for MIPS versus MM over the 6-month trial duration. Costs were 2020 US$ and effectiveness was quality-adjusted life years. Monthly model transitions between modified Rankin Scale score health states were estimated from trial data. Costs were obtained from US databases and literature. MIPS device costs were $5705/patient. Primary outcomes were total hospital costs from the hospital perspective and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio between MIPS and MM (ie, the 6-month cost difference between strategies divided by quality-adjusted life year difference) from the healthcare perspective for patients with lobar ICH. Sensitivity analyses were performed.
RESULTS: From the hospital perspective, MIPS costs were $2782 less per patient than MM ($74 252 versus $77 034), with MIPS having decreased the intensive care unit hospital length of stay, non-MIPS neurosurgery, mortality, and rehospitalization. From the healthcare perspective, including hospital and nonhospital costs, MIPS in lobar ICH cost $8850 less and gained 0.068 quality-adjusted life year per patient compared with MM; thus MIPS was dominant (less costly and more effective). Results were robust to individual parameter variation over plausible ranges and, with all parameters varied simultaneously in a probabilistic sensitivity analysis, MIPS was dominant in >93% of 10 000 model iterations and favored in >99% at $100 000/quality-adjusted life year gained (a common US benchmark).
CONCLUSIONS: In the ENRICH randomized controlled trial, MIPS cost less and was more effective compared with MM from both hospital and healthcare perspectives for patients with lobar ICH.
REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/; Unique identifier: NCT02880878.