• Neurosurgery · Feb 2018

    Systematic Review of Safety and Cost-Effectiveness of Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Strategies in Patients Undergoing Craniotomy for Brain Tumor.

    • Hanna Algattas, Dushyant Damania, Ian DeAndrea-Lazarus, Kristopher T Kimmell, Nicholas F Marko, Kevin A Walter, G Edward Vates, and Babak S Jahromi.
    • Department of Neurosurgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York.
    • Neurosurgery. 2018 Feb 1; 82 (2): 142-154.

    BackgroundStudies have evaluated various strategies to prevent venous thromboembolism (VTE) in neuro-oncology patients, without consensus.ObjectiveTo perform a systematic review with cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of various prophylaxis strategies in tumor patients undergoing craniotomy to determine the safest and most cost-effective prophylaxis regimen.MethodsA literature search was conducted for VTE prophylaxis in brain tumor patients. Articles reporting the type of surgery, choice of VTE prophylaxis, and outcomes were included. Safety of prophylaxis strategies was determined by measuring rates of VTE and intracranial hemorrhage. Cost estimates were collected based on institutional data and existing literature. CEA was performed at 30 d after craniotomy, comparing the following strategies: mechanical prophylaxis (MP), low molecular weight heparin with MP (MP+LMWH), and unfractionated heparin with MP (MP+UFH) to prevent symptomatic VTE. All costs were reported in 2016 US dollars.ResultsA total of 34 studies were reviewed (8 studies evaluated LMWH, 12 for MP, and 7 for UFH individually or in combination; 4 studies used LMWH and UFH preoperatively). Overall probability of VTE was 1.49% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42-3.72) for MP+UFH, 2.72% [95% CI 1.23-5.15] for MP+LMWH, and 2.59% (95% CI 1.31-4.58) for MP, which were not statistically significant. Compared to a control of MP alone, the number needed to treat for MP+UFH is 91 and 769 for MP+LMWH. The risk of intracranial hemorrhage was 0.26% (95% CI 0.01-1.34) for MP, 0.74% (95% CI 0.09-2.61) for MP+UFH, and 2.72% (95% CI 1.23-5.15) for MP+LMWH, which were also not statistically significant. Compared to MP, the number needed to harm for MP+UFH was 208 and for MP+LMWH was 41. Fifteen studies were included in the final CEA. The estimated cost of treatment was $127.47 for MP, $142.20 for MP+UFH, and $169.40 for MP+LMWH. The average cost per quality-adjusted life-year for different strategies was $284.14 for MP+UFH, $338.39 for MP, and $722.87 for MP+LMWH.ConclusionAlthough MP+LMWH is frequently considered the optimal prophylaxis for VTE risk reduction, our model suggests that MP+UFH is the safest and most cost-effective measure to balance VTE and hemorrhage risks in brain tumor patients at lower risk of hemorrhage. MP+LMWH may be more effective for patients at higher risk of VTE.Copyright © 2017 by the Congress of Neurological Surgeons

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…