December 25, 2009Current Opinion in Neurology
Replacing aspirin and warfarin for secondary stroke prevention: is it worth the costs?
Why the study?
Are newer antithrombotic treatments cost-effective compared to aspirin or warfarin for secondary stroke prevention?
Population
Patients requiring secondary stroke prevention (arterial origin or due to atrial fibrillation)
Comparison
Newer antithrombotic treatments vs Aspirin or warfarin
Design
Review
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
Cost-effectiveness of newer antithrombotics remains unestablished; leaves open their preference over aspirin or warfarin for secondary prevention.
Structured PICO
Are newer antithrombotic treatments cost-effective compared to aspirin or warfarin for secondary stroke prevention?
P
Population
Patients requiring secondary stroke prevention (arterial origin or due to atrial fibrillation)
I
Intervention
Newer antithrombotic treatments (clopidogrel, aspirin plus extended-release dipyridamole, dabigatran, percutaneous closure of the left atrial appendage, dronedarone)
C
Comparator
Aspirin or warfarin
O
Outcome
Cost-effectiveness and efficacy for secondary stroke prevention
The cost-effectiveness of newer antithrombotics over traditional aspirin or warfarin for secondary stroke prevention is not yet fully established.
Cite This Study
Graeme J. Hankey (2009) studied this question.