Abstract

IntroductionThe aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban and apixaban versus enoxaparin for the universal prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and associated long-term complications in Chinese patients after total hip replacement (THR).MethodsA decision model, which included both acute VTE (represented as a decision tree) and the long-term complications of VTE (represented as a Markov model), was developed to assess the economic outcomes of the three prophylactic strategies for Chinese patients after THR. Transition probabilities for acute VTE were derived from two randomized controlled studies, RECORD1 and ADVANCE3, of patients after THR. The transition probabilities of long-term complications after acute VTE, utilities, and costs were derived from the published literature and local healthcare settings. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed to test the uncertainty concerning the model parameters. The quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and direct medical costs were reported over a 5-year horizon, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were also calculated.ResultsThromboprophylaxis with apixaban was estimated to have a higher cost (US $178.70) and more health benefits (0.0025 QALY) than thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin over a 5-year time horizon, which resulted in an ICER of US $71,244 per QALY gained and was more than three times the GDP per capita of China in 2014 (US $22,140). Owing to the higher cost and lower generated QALYs, rivaroxaban was inferior to enoxaparin among post-THR patients. The sensitivity analyses confirmed these results.ConclusionsThe analysis found that apixaban was not cost-effective and that rivaroxaban was inferior to enoxaparin. This finding indicates that compared with enoxaparin, the use of apixaban for VTE prophylaxis after THR does not represent a good value for the cost at the acceptable threshold in China; in addition, the cost of rivaroxaban was higher with lower QALYs.

Highlights

  • The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban and apixaban versus enoxaparin for the universal prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and associated long-term complications in Chinese patients after total hip replacement (THR).Enhanced content To view enhanced content for this article go to http://www.medengine.com/Redeem/ 8237F0604B39EFA6.X

  • Owing to the higher cost and lower generated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), rivaroxaban was inferior to enoxaparin among post-THR patients

  • The analysis found that apixaban was not cost-effective and that rivaroxaban was inferior to enoxaparin

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban and apixaban versus enoxaparin for the universal prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and associated long-term complications in Chinese patients after total hip replacement (THR). X. Gu Department of Respiratory Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People’s Hospital, Yishang Road 600, Shanghai, China. Z. Xu Department of Cardiology, Renji Hospital, South Campus, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China. Xu Department of Cardiology, Renji Hospital, South Campus, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China Major orthopedic surgery, such as total knee replacement (TKR) and total hip replacement (THR), is associated with a high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), which comprises deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) [1]. Rivaroxaban (XareltoÒ, Bayer Schering Pharma AG) and apixaban

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call