Search

Background and Objective: Evidence-based guidelines on platelet transfusion therapy assist clinicians to optimize patient care, but currently do not take into account costs associated with different methods used during the preparation, storage, selection and dosing of platelets for transfusion. This systematic review aimed to summarize the available literature regarding the cost effectiveness (CE) of these methods. Methods: Eight databases and registries, as well as 58 grey literature sources, were searched up to 29 October 2021 for full economic evaluations comparing the CE of methods for preparation, storage, selection and dosing of allogeneic platelets intended for transfusion in adults. Incremental CE ratios, expressed as standardized cost (in 2022 EUR) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) or per health outcome, were synthesized narratively. Studies were critically appraised using the Philips checklist. Results: Fifteen full economic evaluations were identified. Eight investigated the costs and health consequences (transfusion-related events, bacterial and viral infections or illnesses) of pathogen reduction. The estimated incremental cost per QALY varied widely from EUR 259,614 to EUR 36,688,323. For other methods, such as pathogen testing/culturing, use of apheresis instead of whole blood-derived platelets, and storage in platelet additive solution, evidence was sparse. Overall, the quality and applicability of the included studies was limited. Conclusions: Our findings are of interest to decision makers who consider implementing pathogen reduction. For other preparation, storage, selection and dosing methods in platelet transfusion, CE remains unclear due to insufficient and outdated evaluations. Future high-quality research is needed to expand the evidence base and increase our confidence in the findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Thrombopoietin (TPO) mimetics are a potential alternative to platelet transfusion to minimize blood loss in patients with thrombocytopenia. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TPO mimetics, compared with not using TPO mimetics, in adult patients with thrombocytopenia. Methods: Eight databases and registries were searched for full economic evaluations (EEs) and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were synthesized as cost per quality-adjusted life year gained (QALY) or as cost per health outcome (e.g. bleeding event avoided). Included studies were critically appraised using the Philips reporting checklist. Results: Eighteen evaluations from nine different countries were included, evaluating the cost-effectiveness of TPO mimetics compared with no TPO, watch-and-rescue therapy, the standard of care, rituximab, splenectomy or platelet transfusion. ICERs varied from a dominant strategy (i.e. cost-saving and more effective), to an incremental cost per QALY/health outcome of EUR 25,000–50,000, EUR 75,000–750,000 and EUR > 1 million, to a dominated strategy (cost-increasing and less effective). Few evaluations (n = 2, 10%) addressed the four principal types of uncertainty (methodological, structural, heterogeneity and parameter). Parameter uncertainty was most frequently reported (80%), followed by heterogeneity (45%), structural uncertainty (43%) and methodological uncertainty (28%). Conclusions: Cost-effectiveness of TPO mimetics in adult patients with thrombocytopenia ranged from a dominant strategy to a significant incremental cost per QALY/health outcome or a strategy that is clinically inferior and has increased costs. Future validation and tackling the uncertainty of these models with country-specific cost data and up-to-date efficacy and safety data are needed to increase the generalizability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: For anaemic elective surgery patients, current clinical practice guidelines weakly recommend the routine use of iron, but not erythrocyte-stimulating agents (ESAs), except for short-acting ESAs in major orthopaedic surgery. This recommendation is, however, not based on any cost-effectiveness studies. The aim of this research was to (1) systematically review the literature regarding cost effectiveness of preoperative iron and/or ESAs in anaemic, elective surgery patients and (2) update existing economic evaluations (EEs) with recent data. Methods: Eight databases and registries were searched for EEs and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting cost-effectiveness data on November 11, 2020. Data were extracted, narratively synthesized and critically appraised using the Philips reporting checklist. Pre-existing full EEs were updated with effectiveness data from a recent systematic review and current cost data. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were expressed as cost per (quality-adjusted) life-year [(QA)LY] gained. Results: Only five studies (4 EEs and 1 RCT) were included, one on intravenous iron and four on ESAs + oral iron. The EE on intravenous iron only had an in-hospital time horizon. Therefore, cost effectiveness of preoperative iron remains uncertain. The three EEs on ESAs had a lifetime time horizon, but reported cost per (QA)LY gained of 20–65 million (GBP or CAD). Updating these analyses with current data confirmed ESAs to have a cost per (QA)LY gained of 3.5–120 million (GBP or CAD). Conclusions: Cost effectiveness of preoperative iron is unproven, whereas routine preoperative ESA therapy cannot be considered cost effective in elective surgery, based on the limited available data. Future guidelines should reflect these findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A recently published, high-quality network meta-analysis of patient blood management interventions (including preoperative iron treatment in anaemia) also concluded that there currently is too little evidence of sufficient quality to make strong conclusions about the cost-effectiveness of patient blood management interventions [[6]]. Apart from the obvious risk of bias associated with the use of historical controls [[4]], the historical control group of unscreened patients includes both patients with iron-deficient anaemia and patients with non-iron-deficient anaemia, while the intervention group only contains patients with iron-deficient anaemia, making any comparison between these two groups unreliable. Effectiveness of iron supplementation with or without erythropoiesis-stimulating agents on red blood cell utilization in patients with preoperative anaemia undergoing elective surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. [Extracted from the article]