Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2000 Feb;15(2):108-15.
doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2000.03349.x.

Cost-effectiveness of low-molecular-weight heparin in the treatment of proximal deep vein thrombosis

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Cost-effectiveness of low-molecular-weight heparin in the treatment of proximal deep vein thrombosis

C A Estrada et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2000 Feb.

Abstract

Objective: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in the treatment of proximal lower extremity deep venous thrombosis.

Design: Cost-effectiveness analysis that includes the treatment of the index case and simulated 3-month follow-up.

Setting: Acute care facility.

Patients and participants: Hypothetical cohorts of 1,000 patients who present with proximal deep venous thrombosis.

Interventions: Intravenous unfractionated heparin (UH), LMWH (40% at home, 60% in hospital), or selective UH/LMWH (UH for hospitalized patients and LMWH for patients treated at home).

Measurements and main results: The outcomes were recurrent thrombosis, mortality, direct medical costs, and marginal cost-effectiveness ratios from the payer's perspective. At the base-case and under most assumptions in the sensitivity analysis, the LMWH and the selective UH/LMWH strategies dominate the UH strategy i.e., they result in fewer cases of recurrent thrombosis and fewer deaths, and they save resources. The savings occur primarily by decreasing the length of stay. The LMWH strategy resulted in lower costs as compared with the UH strategy when the proportion of patients treated at home was more than 14%. Treating 1, 000 patients with the LMWH strategy as compared with the UH/LMWH strategy would result in 10 fewer cases of recurrent thrombosis, 1.2 fewer deaths, at an additional cost of $96,822; the cost-effectiveness ratio was $9,667 and $80,685 per recurrent thrombosis or death prevented, respectively.

Conclusions: Treatment with LMWH leads to savings and better outcomes as compared with UH in patients with lower extremity deep venous thrombosis. The selective UH/LMWH strategy is an alternative option.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Decision tree. UH indicates unfractionated heparin; LMWH, low-molecular-weight heparin.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Costs and outcomes of treatment with unfractionated heparin for all (UH), low-molecular-weight heparin for all (LMWH), and selective (UH/LMWH) according of relative effectiveness.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Hirsh J, Hoak J. Management of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism: a statement for healthcare professionals. Council on Thrombosis (in consultation with the Council on Cardiovascular Radiology), American Heart Association. Circulation. 1996;93:2212–45. - PubMed
    1. Prandoni P, Lensing AW, Cogo A, et al. The long-term clinical course of acute deep venous thrombosis. Ann Intern Med. 1996;125:1–7. - PubMed
    1. Raschke RA, Reilly BM, Guidry JR, Fontana JR, Srinivas S. The weight-based heparin dosing nomogram compared with a “standard care” nomogram: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 1993;119:874–81. - PubMed
    1. Hirsh J, Warkentin TE, Raschke R, Granger C, Ohman EM, Dalen JE. Heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin: mechanisms of action, pharmacokinetics, dosing considerations, monitoring, efficacy, and safety. Chest. 1998;114:489S–510S. - PubMed
    1. Hyers TM. Venous thromboembolism. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1999;159:1–14. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances