Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2018
Cost Effectiveness of Early Insertion of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunts for Recurrent Ascites.
СтатьяПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАНазвание 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.
Shen Nicole T, Schneider Yecheskel, Congly Stephen E, Rosenblatt Russell E, Namn Yunseok, Fortune Brett E, Jesudian Arun, Brown Robert S
Аннотация
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Treatment options for recurrent ascites resulting from decompensated cirrhosis include serial large-volume paracentesis and albumin infusion (LVP+A) or insertion of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). Insertion of TIPSs with covered stents during early stages of ascites (early TIPS, defined as 2 LVPs within the past 3 weeks and <6 LVPs in the prior 3 months) significantly improves chances of survival and reduces complications of cirrhosis compared with LVP+A. However, it is not clear if TIPS insertion is cost effective in these patients.
METHODS: We developed a Markov model using the payer perspective for a hypothetical cohort of patients with cirrhosis with recurrent ascites receiving early TIPSs or LVP+A using data from publications and national databases collected from 2012 to 2018. Projected outcomes included quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), costs (2017 US dollars), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; $/QALY). Sensitivity analyses (1-way, 2-way, and probabilistic) were conducted. ICERs less than $100,000 per QALY were considered cost effective.
RESULTS: In base-case analysis, early insertion of TIPS had a higher cost ($22,770) than LVP+A ($19,180), but also increased QALY (0.73 for early TIPSs and 0.65 for LVP+A), resulting in an ICER of $46,310/QALY. Results were sensitive to cost of uncomplicated TIPS insertion and transplant, need for LVP+A, probability of transplant, and decompensated QALY. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, TIPS insertion was the optimal strategy in 59.1% of simulations.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on Markov model analysis, early placement of TIPSs appears to be a cost-effective strategy for management of specific patients with cirrhosis and recurrent ascites. TIPS placement should be considered early and as a first-line treatment option for select patients.
METHODS: We developed a Markov model using the payer perspective for a hypothetical cohort of patients with cirrhosis with recurrent ascites receiving early TIPSs or LVP+A using data from publications and national databases collected from 2012 to 2018. Projected outcomes included quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), costs (2017 US dollars), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; $/QALY). Sensitivity analyses (1-way, 2-way, and probabilistic) were conducted. ICERs less than $100,000 per QALY were considered cost effective.
RESULTS: In base-case analysis, early insertion of TIPS had a higher cost ($22,770) than LVP+A ($19,180), but also increased QALY (0.73 for early TIPSs and 0.65 for LVP+A), resulting in an ICER of $46,310/QALY. Results were sensitive to cost of uncomplicated TIPS insertion and transplant, need for LVP+A, probability of transplant, and decompensated QALY. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, TIPS insertion was the optimal strategy in 59.1% of simulations.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on Markov model analysis, early placement of TIPSs appears to be a cost-effective strategy for management of specific patients with cirrhosis and recurrent ascites. TIPS placement should be considered early and as a first-line treatment option for select patients.