Why the study?
In UA and NSTEMI pretreatment before coronary angiography, triple antiplatelet therapy has limited data due to increased bleeding risk, and no prior study had directly compared the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of DAPT versus TAPT.
Current pretreatment guidelines for coronary angiography in unstable angina (UA) and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) involve the use of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT: aspirin + adenosine diphosphate (ADP) P2Y12 inhibitor), whereas the use of triple antiplatelet therapy (TAPT: aspirin + ADP P2Y12 inhibitor + GpIIb/IIIa inhibitor) has limited data due to the increased bleeding risk. However, a study directly comparing the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of DAPT vs. TAPT has not been done. A decision analysis was constructed to determine the ideal pretreatment antiplatelet regimen for UA/NSTEMI patients. The parameters were calculated based on published randomized clinical trials. They consisted of probabilities based on a pretreatment strategy (DAPT, TAPT), interventions (percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), medical management), and 30-day outcomes (no event, bleeding, vascular event, death). A 10,000 run Monte Carlo simulation provided two outputs: estimated life-years extended and costs for each treatment modality. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were taken into consideration using calculated coefficients from the literature. The cost/QALY ratio was $1,923/QALY for DAPT vs. $4,734/QALY for TAPT. The use of DAPT for pretreatment was favored (2.46 more cost-effective than TAPT). These results will aid clinicians in providing the most clinically sound and fiscally responsible care for UA/NSTEMI patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Reddy et al. (2019) studied Unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (UA/NSTEMI) (n=10,000). Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT: aspirin + P2Y12 inhibitor) vs. Triple antiplatelet therapy (TAPT: aspirin + P2Y12 inhibitor + GpIIb/IIIa inhibitor) was evaluated on Cost per quality-adjusted life-year (cost/QALY ratio).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: