首页> 外文期刊>The American heart journal >Clinical outcomes and cost implications of routine early PCI after fibrinolysis: One-year follow-up of the trial of routine angioplasty and stenting after fibrinolysis to enhance reperfusion in acute myocardial infarction (TRANSFER-AMI) study
【24h】

Clinical outcomes and cost implications of routine early PCI after fibrinolysis: One-year follow-up of the trial of routine angioplasty and stenting after fibrinolysis to enhance reperfusion in acute myocardial infarction (TRANSFER-AMI) study

机译:纤溶后常规早期PCI的临床结果和费用影响:纤溶后常规血管成形术和支架置入试验在急性心肌梗死(TRANSFER-AMI)研究中进行为期一年的随访

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background In patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with fibrinolysis, routine early percutaneous coronary intervention (r-PCI) improves clinical outcomes at 30 days compared with a more standard approach of performing early PCI only for failed fibrinolysis (s-PCI). Methods We report prespecified secondary clinical outcomes and cost implications of r-PCI compared with s-PCI from the Canadian TRANSFER-AMI trial. Average cost per patient in each arm was calculated based on a microcosting approach. Bootstrap method (5,000 samples) was used to calculate standard errors and 95% CI. Results At 1 year, rates of death or reinfarction (10.3% vs 11.6%, P =.50), hospital readmission (15.4% vs 16.5%, P =.64) and subsequent revascularization after index hospitalization (6.9% vs 8.7%, P =.30) were similar between the r-PCI and s-PCI arms. The difference in cost per patient between r-PCI and s-PCI was CAD $1,003 (95% CI, -$247 to $2,211). Since a greater proportion of patients were transported by air (vs land) in the r-PCI arm (9.4% vs 3%), and the ratio of abciximab to eptifibatide use was higher in the r-PCI arm compared with s-PCI (2:1 vs 4:5), we undertook additional post hoc cost scenario analyses. In a scenario where patients are transported by land only and eptifibatide is used as the sole GPIIb/IIIa inhibitor, the difference in cost per patient between r-PCI and s-PCI was estimated to be CAD $108 (95% CI, -$1,114 to $1,344). Conclusions At 1 year, there is no difference in the clinical composite outcome of death or reinfarction between r-PCI and s-PCI strategies. Greater cost with r-PCI, although statistically insignificant, is economically important.
机译:背景技术在采用纤溶治疗的ST抬高型心肌梗死患者中,常规的早期经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(r-PCI)与仅针对失败的纤溶治疗(s-PCI)进行更早期PCI的更标准方法相比,可改善30天的临床疗效。方法我们报告了加拿大TRANSFER-AMI试验中r-PCI与s-PCI相比预先确定的次要临床结局和费用影响。每位患者每组的平均成本是根据微成本法计算得出的。引导法(5,000个样本)用于计算标准误差和95%CI。结果在1年时,死亡率或再梗死发生率(10.3%对11.6%,P = .50),住院再入院率(15.4%对16.5%,P = .64)和指数住院后的随后血运重建(6.9%对8.7%, P-.30)在r-PCI和s-PCI臂之间相似。 r-PCI和s-PCI之间每位患者的成本差异为1,003加元(95%CI,-247美元至2,211美元)。由于在r-PCI组中有更多的患者是空运(vs陆运)(9.4%vs 3%),因此与r-PCI组相比,r-PCI组中abciximab与eptifibatide的使用率更高( 2:1 vs 4:5),我们还进行了事后成本情景分析。在仅通过陆路运输患者并且使用依替非巴肽作为唯一GPIIb / IIIa抑制剂的情况下,r-PCI和s-PCI之间每位患者的费用差异估计为108加元(95%CI,-1,114加元)。 1,344美元)。结论1年时,r-PCI和s-PCI策略在死亡或再梗死的临床综合结局方面没有差异。尽管从统计学上讲微不足道,但r-PCI的较高成本在经济上很重要。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号