J M Jones1, N Bhutiani1, D Wei2, L Goldstein3, C M Jones1, R M Cannon4. 1. University of Louisville, Department of Surgery, Division of Transplantation, Louisville, KY, USA. 2. Epidemiology, Medical Devices, Johnson & Johnson, New Brunswick, NJ, USA. 3. Global Health Economics and Market Access, Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA. 4. University of Louisville, Department of Surgery, Division of Transplantation, Louisville, KY, USA. Electronic address: Rmcann03@louisville.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This study sought to approximate the cost-effectiveness of tPA utilization for prevention of biliary strictures (PTBS) in donation after circulatory death liver transplantation (DCD-LT). METHODS: Previously-reported PTBS rates in DCD-LT with and without tPA were used to calculate the number needed to treat (NNT) for prevention of one PTBS. The incremental cost of PTBS was then used to determine the cost effectiveness of tPA for prevention of PTBS. RESULTS: The incidence of PTBS in the setting of tPA administration was 20%, while incidence in patients without tPA use was 43% (p < 0.001). Meta-analysis demonstrated a risk reduction of 15.7%, which translated into a NNT of 6.4. Cost associated with treating 6.4 patients was $50,353. Based on an incremental cost of $81,888 associated with PTBS management, use of tPA in DCD-LT protocols was estimated to save $31,528 per PTBS prevented. CONCLUSION: Utilization of tPA in DCD-LT protocols represents one possible cost-effective strategy for prevention of PTBS in DCD-LT.
INTRODUCTION: This study sought to approximate the cost-effectiveness of tPA utilization for prevention of biliary strictures (PTBS) in donation after circulatory death liver transplantation (DCD-LT). METHODS: Previously-reported PTBS rates in DCD-LT with and without tPA were used to calculate the number needed to treat (NNT) for prevention of one PTBS. The incremental cost of PTBS was then used to determine the cost effectiveness of tPA for prevention of PTBS. RESULTS: The incidence of PTBS in the setting of tPA administration was 20%, while incidence in patients without tPA use was 43% (p < 0.001). Meta-analysis demonstrated a risk reduction of 15.7%, which translated into a NNT of 6.4. Cost associated with treating 6.4 patients was $50,353. Based on an incremental cost of $81,888 associated with PTBS management, use of tPA in DCD-LT protocols was estimated to save $31,528 per PTBS prevented. CONCLUSION: Utilization of tPA in DCD-LT protocols represents one possible cost-effective strategy for prevention of PTBS in DCD-LT.