Why the study?
Preoperative ticagrelor increases perioperative bleeding risks during urgent cardiac surgery, but the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of an intraoperative ticagrelor-removal hemoadsorption device were unknown.
Is a novel hemoadsorption device cost-effective compared to standard practices for reducing bleeding risk in patients on preoperative ticagrelor undergoing urgent CABG?
Is a novel hemoadsorption device cost-effective compared to standard practices for reducing bleeding risk in patients on preoperative ticagrelor undergoing urgent CABG?
A novel hemoadsorption device to remove ticagrelor during urgent CABG is projected to be cost-saving and improve clinical outcomes compared to standard care.
Supports modeling of hemoadsorption in ticagrelor patients needing urgent CABG; leaves open prospective validation before practice change.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cohen et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: