Why the study?
Does an early invasive strategy improve cost-effectiveness compared to a conservative strategy in patients with UA/NSTEMI treated with tirofiban?
Population
1,722 patients at US-non-VA hospitals with unstable angina or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction…
Comparison
Early invasive strategy with routine… vs Conservative strategy with catheterization…
Design
RCT, Randomized
Follow-up
6 months
Authors
Loading...
Supports early invasive strategy as cost-effective in UA/NSTEMI; extends efficacy data with favorable economic profile.
Does an early invasive strategy improve cost-effectiveness compared to a conservative strategy in patients with UA/NSTEMI treated with tirofiban?
An early invasive strategy for UA/NSTEMI provides clinical benefit with only a small increase in total 6-month costs, yielding a highly favorable cost per year of life gained.
Elizabeth M. Mahoney (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: