Comparison Of Overall Costs Between Alprostadil And Limb Amputation In Patients Affected By Peripheral Arterial Disease Stages Iii And Iv In Mexico

Abstract

Sixteen economic analyses were included; all studies used decision-tree structures to model acute prophylaxis, and 13 included a chronic-phase Markov module to capture long-term complications and recurrent VTE events. The model structures generally captured the important events needed to accurately estimate differences in costs and outcomes between different treatment strategies. Eleven studies included rivaroxaban, 9 studies included dabigatran, 3 studies included apixaban, and no studies included edoxaban. The analyses that compared a NOAC with low molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) predominantly resulted in the NOAC dominating LMWH for patients with both THR and TKR. The results of analyses that compared NOACs with each other suggested that dabigatran is the least cost-effective option. There is limited evidence directly comparing rivaroxaban with apixaban, but our results suggested that rivaroxaban dominates apixaban for patients with TKR in the United Kingdom. ConClusions: Economic analyses of NOACs for primary VTE prophylaxis following THR and TKR surgeries show reasonable consistency in the model structures used and events captured. The results strongly suggest that NOACs are cost-effective alternatives to LMWH. Dabigatran appears to be the least cost-effective NOAC. However, more research is needed to assess the cost-effectiveness of apixaban and edoxaban.

The effect of alprostadil on preventing contrast-induced nephropathy for percutaneous coronary intervention in diabetic patients

“…[16] Alprostadil has extensive physiological and pharmacological effects, including vasodilation, inhibits platelet aggregation, promote erythrocyte deformation, thus improving microcirculation. Research [17,18] has also shown that alprostadil can stabilize the cell membrane, lysosomes and reduce the release of harmful cytokines, increasing renal blood flow, reducing the damage of the contrast agent to the blood vessel.…”