Key result
Oral direct factor Xa inhibitors were economically dominant compared with low-molecular-weight heparins for VTE prophylaxis in THR and TKR surgery, yielding lower costs and higher QALYs.
Why the study?
Are oral direct factor Xa inhibitors cost-effective compared with low-molecular-weight heparin for VTE prophylaxis in patients undergoing total hip or knee replacement surgery?
Population
Patients undergoing total hip replacement (THR) or total knee replacement (TKR) surgery
Comparison
Oral direct factor Xa inhibitors vs Subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparins
Design
Other
Follow-up
180 days
Authors
Loading...
May favor oral factor Xa inhibitors for VTE prophylaxis post-THR/TKR in Medicare patients; leaves open prospective validation of dominance.
Are oral direct factor Xa inhibitors cost-effective compared with low-molecular-weight heparin for VTE prophylaxis in patients undergoing total hip or knee replacement surgery?
Oral direct factor Xa inhibitors are an economically dominant strategy (less costly and more efficacious) compared with low-molecular-weight heparins for VTE prophylaxis after total hip or knee replacement surgery from a U.S. Medicare perspective.
Mahmoudi et al. (2013) studied Total hip or knee replacement surgery requiring VTE prophylaxis. Oral direct factor Xa inhibitors (rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban) vs. Low-molecular-weight heparins (enoxaparin, dalteparin) was evaluated on Cost-effectiveness (costs and QALYs). Oral direct factor Xa inhibitors were economically dominant compared with low-molecular-weight heparins for VTE prophylaxis in THR and TKR surgery, yielding lower costs and higher QALYs.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: