Key result
A bivalirudin-based strategy for STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI saved an average of $1,690 per patient in procedural costs compared with a UFH+GPI-based strategy.
Why the study?
Does a bivalirudin-based strategy reduce costs and complications compared to UFH+GPI in STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI?
Population
ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention in…
Comparison
Bivalirudin-based strategy vs Unfractionated heparin + glycoprotein IIb/IIIa…
Design
Other
Follow-up
30-day
Authors
Loading...
May inform US hospital cost models for STEMI PCI; leaves open randomized confirmation of net clinical benefit.
Does a bivalirudin-based strategy reduce costs and complications compared to UFH+GPI in STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI?
Effect estimate: $1690 savings
Absolute Event Rate: 16872% vs 18561%
A bivalirudin-based strategy for primary PCI in STEMI patients is projected to be cost-saving and reduce bleeding complications compared to UFH plus GPIs from a US hospital perspective.
Olchanski et al. (2010) studied ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Bivalirudin-based strategy vs. Unfractionated heparin (UFH) + glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) was evaluated on Average procedure costs per patient ($1690 savings). A bivalirudin-based strategy for STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI saved an average of $1,690 per patient in procedural costs compared with a UFH+GPI-based strategy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: