Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
PLoS One ; 17(6): e0264563, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35709152

RESUMO

In addition to statin therapy, Ezetimibe, a non-statin lipid-modifying agent, is increasingly used to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk. Literature suggests the clinical effectiveness of Ezetimibe plus statin (EPS) therapy; however, primary evidence on its economic effectiveness is inconsistent. Hence, we pooled incremental net benefit to synthesise the cost-effectiveness of EPS therapy. We identified economic evaluation studies reporting outcomes of EPS therapy compared with other lipid-lowering therapeutic agents or placebo by searching PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Tufts Cost-Effective Analysis registry. Using random-effects meta-analysis, we pooled Incremental Net Benefit (INB) in the US $ with a 95% confidence interval (CI). We used the modified economic evaluations bias checklist and GRADE quality assessment for quality appraisal. The pooled INB from twenty-one eligible studies showed that EPS therapy was significantly cost-effective compared to other lipid-lowering therapeutic agents or placebo. The pooled INB (95% CI) was $4,274 (621 to 7,927), but there was considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 84.21). On subgroup analysis EPS therapy is significantly cost-effective in high-income countries [$4,356 (621 to 8,092)], for primary prevention [$4,814 (2,523 to 7,106)], and for payers' perspective [$3,255 (571 to 5,939)], and from lifetime horizon [$4,571 (746 to 8,395)]. EPS therapy is cost-effective compared to other lipid-lowering therapeutic agents or placebo in high-income countries and for primary prevention. However, there is a dearth of evidence from lower-middle-income countries and the societal perspective.


Assuntos
Anticolesterolemiantes , Inibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Redutases , Anticolesterolemiantes/uso terapêutico , LDL-Colesterol , Análise Custo-Benefício , Quimioterapia Combinada , Ezetimiba/uso terapêutico
2.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34261757

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of early cholecystectomy for gallstone diseases treatment is uncertain compared with conservative management/delayed cholecystectomy. AIMS: To synthesise treatment outcomes of early cholecystectomy versus conservative management/delayed cholecystectomy in terms of its safety and effectiveness. DESIGN: We systematically searched randomised control trials investigating the effectiveness of early cholecystectomy compared with conservative management/delayed cholecystectomy. We pooled the risk ratios with a 95% CI, also estimated adjusted number needed to treat to harm. RESULTS: Of the 40 included studies for systematic review, 39 studies with 4483 patients are included in meta-analysis. Among the risk ratios of gallstone complications, pain (0.38, 0.20 to 0.74), cholangitis (0.52, 0.28 to 0.97) and total biliary complications (0.33, 0.20 to 0.55) are significantly lower with early cholecystectomy. Adjusted number needed to treat to harm of early cholecystectomy compared with conservative management/delayed cholecystectomy are, for pain 12.5 (8.3 to 33.3), biliary pancreatitis >1000 (50-100), common bile duct stones 100 (33.3 to 100), cholangitis (100 (25-100), total biliary complications 5.9 (4.3 to 9.1) and mortality >1000 (100 to100 000). CONCLUSIONS: Early cholecystectomy may result in fewer biliary complications and a reduction in reported abdominal pain than conservative management. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: 2020 CRD42020192612.


Assuntos
Cálculos Biliares , Pancreatite , Colecistectomia , Tratamento Conservador , Cálculos Biliares/cirurgia , Humanos , Pancreatite/cirurgia , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...