Key result
Enoxaparin VTE prophylaxis proves cost-effective only in extensive lumbar fusions with an NNT of 50.
Why the study?
This study evaluated whether enoxaparin is cost-effective for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion.
Does a 7-day course of enoxaparin 40 mg daily improve cost-effectiveness for VTE prophylaxis in patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion?
Does a 7-day course of enoxaparin 40 mg daily improve cost-effectiveness for VTE prophylaxis in patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion?
A 7-day course of enoxaparin is cost-effective for VTE prophylaxis in posterior lumbar fusions of 7-12 segments, but not for fewer segments under current cost assumptions.
May support enoxaparin only for 7-12 segment fusions; hypothesis-generating pending randomized cost-effectiveness data.
STUDY DESIGN: Break-even cost analysis. OBJECTIVES: This study uses a break-even cost-effectiveness model to assess whether enoxaparin is cost-effective for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion (PLF). METHODS: A 7-day course of enoxaparin 40 mg daily was evaluated using average retail drug costs and literature-based treatment costs for symptomatic VTE. VTE rates after PLF at 2, 3-6, and 7-12 vertebral segments were identified in the TriNetX Diamond database (2018-2023) for patients without prophylaxis. A break-even model calculated the absolute risk reduction and number needed to treat (NNT) for cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: The 7-day enoxaparin course cost $411.34, and treating a symptomatic VTE cost $20,461.32. The overall VTE rate was 0.49%; rates were 0.38% (2-segment), 0.65% (3-6 segments), and 2.7% (7-12 segments). Enoxaparin was cost-effective only for 7-12 segment fusions (NNT=50). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated cost-effectiveness for all PLF and 3-6 segment fusions if drug cost is ≤$100.00, or for 2-segment fusions if ≤$50.00. Alternatively, it is cost-effective if VTE treatment costs ≥$100,000 (all PLF, 2-segment) or ≥$75,000 (3-6 segments). CONCLUSIONS: Enoxaparin is cost-effective for PLF of 7-12 segments but not for PLF of fewer than 7 segments. Lower drug costs or higher treatment costs could make prophylaxis cost-effective for PLF of fewer segments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chopra et al. (2026) studied Posterior lumbar fusion (PLF). Enoxaparin vs. No prophylaxis was evaluated on Cost-effectiveness for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis (NNT 50). A 7-day course of enoxaparin 40 mg daily was cost-effective for VTE prophylaxis only in posterior lumbar fusions of 7-12 segments (NNT=50), but not for fewer than 7 segments.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: