急性-慢性肝衰竭治疗策略的成本-效果分析。

IF 0.8
Wei-Bo Guo, Xi-Ju Guo, Meng-Yao Zheng, Xuan-Cheng Xie, Yong-Pin Wang, Bo Gan, Jin-Hui Yang
{"title":"急性-慢性肝衰竭治疗策略的成本-效果分析。","authors":"Wei-Bo Guo, Xi-Ju Guo, Meng-Yao Zheng, Xuan-Cheng Xie, Yong-Pin Wang, Bo Gan, Jin-Hui Yang","doi":"10.1016/j.transproceed.2025.08.026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of 3 artificial liver models, plasma exchange (PE), the double plasma molecular absorption system (DPMAS), and a combination of plasma exchange with the double plasma molecular absorption system (PE + DPMAS) as well as medical drugs in treating patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective approach was employed to collect clinical data from electronic medical records. The study included 296 patients who met the inclusion criteria and were categorized based on their treatment into 2 groups: the medical treatment group and the artificial liver group, the latter of which included PE, DPMAS, and PE + DPMAS. To compare the costs and effectiveness of the medical treatment group with the 3 artificial liver treatment groups, a pharmacoeconomic cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted to assess the economic aspects.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The effectiveness rate of the PE + DPMAS group was 76.9%, which was significantly higher than that of the PE and DPMAS group (P < .05). The effectiveness rate of the PE group was similar to that of the DPMAS group (P > .05). The effectiveness rate in all 3 artificial liver treatment groups was higher than that of the medical treatment group (P < .05). The total cost per person was RMB 54,661.6, RMB 61,385.5, RMB 71,789.2, and RMB 65,945.7 in the medical treatment, and the artificial liver PE group, DPMAS, and PE + DPMAS groups, respectively. The cost-effectiveness ratio (C/E) was 2009.6, 1162.6, 1511.4, and 758.9, respectively. The sensitivity analysis results for costs were consistent with the cost-effectiveness analysis results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The artificial liver treatment group demonstrated a superior \"performance-cost ratio,\" with the PE + DPMAS group being the most effective. This combination can be considered the optimal treatment for acute-on-chronic liver failure when combined with appropriate drug therapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":94258,"journal":{"name":"Transplantation proceedings","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of the Cost-Effectiveness of Treatment Strategies for Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure.\",\"authors\":\"Wei-Bo Guo, Xi-Ju Guo, Meng-Yao Zheng, Xuan-Cheng Xie, Yong-Pin Wang, Bo Gan, Jin-Hui Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.transproceed.2025.08.026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of 3 artificial liver models, plasma exchange (PE), the double plasma molecular absorption system (DPMAS), and a combination of plasma exchange with the double plasma molecular absorption system (PE + DPMAS) as well as medical drugs in treating patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective approach was employed to collect clinical data from electronic medical records. The study included 296 patients who met the inclusion criteria and were categorized based on their treatment into 2 groups: the medical treatment group and the artificial liver group, the latter of which included PE, DPMAS, and PE + DPMAS. To compare the costs and effectiveness of the medical treatment group with the 3 artificial liver treatment groups, a pharmacoeconomic cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted to assess the economic aspects.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The effectiveness rate of the PE + DPMAS group was 76.9%, which was significantly higher than that of the PE and DPMAS group (P < .05). The effectiveness rate of the PE group was similar to that of the DPMAS group (P > .05). The effectiveness rate in all 3 artificial liver treatment groups was higher than that of the medical treatment group (P < .05). The total cost per person was RMB 54,661.6, RMB 61,385.5, RMB 71,789.2, and RMB 65,945.7 in the medical treatment, and the artificial liver PE group, DPMAS, and PE + DPMAS groups, respectively. The cost-effectiveness ratio (C/E) was 2009.6, 1162.6, 1511.4, and 758.9, respectively. The sensitivity analysis results for costs were consistent with the cost-effectiveness analysis results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The artificial liver treatment group demonstrated a superior \\\"performance-cost ratio,\\\" with the PE + DPMAS group being the most effective. This combination can be considered the optimal treatment for acute-on-chronic liver failure when combined with appropriate drug therapy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94258,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transplantation proceedings\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transplantation proceedings\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2025.08.026\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transplantation proceedings","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2025.08.026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在评价血浆置换(PE)、双血浆分子吸收系统(DPMAS)、血浆置换与双血浆分子吸收系统(PE + DPMAS)联合使用以及药物治疗急性慢性肝衰竭患者的成本-效果。方法:采用回顾性方法,从电子病历中收集临床资料。本研究纳入296例符合纳入标准的患者,根据治疗情况分为内科治疗组和人工肝组,人工肝组包括PE、DPMAS和PE + DPMAS。为了比较内科治疗组与3个人工肝治疗组的成本和效果,进行药物经济学成本-效果分析,对经济方面进行评估。结果:PE + DPMAS组有效率为76.9%,显著高于PE + DPMAS组(P < 0.05)。PE组有效率与DPMAS组相似(P < 0.05)。3个人工肝治疗组的有效率均高于内科治疗组(P < 0.05)。医疗组、人工肝PE组、DPMAS组、PE + DPMAS组人均总费用分别为54661.6元、61385.5元、71789.2元、65945.7元。成本效益比(C/E)分别为2009.6、1162.6、1511.4和758.9。成本敏感性分析结果与成本-效果分析结果一致。结论:人工肝治疗组表现出优越的“性能-成本比”,其中PE + DPMAS组最有效。当与适当的药物治疗相结合时,这种组合可以被认为是急性慢性肝衰竭的最佳治疗方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Analysis of the Cost-Effectiveness of Treatment Strategies for Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of 3 artificial liver models, plasma exchange (PE), the double plasma molecular absorption system (DPMAS), and a combination of plasma exchange with the double plasma molecular absorption system (PE + DPMAS) as well as medical drugs in treating patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure.

Methods: A retrospective approach was employed to collect clinical data from electronic medical records. The study included 296 patients who met the inclusion criteria and were categorized based on their treatment into 2 groups: the medical treatment group and the artificial liver group, the latter of which included PE, DPMAS, and PE + DPMAS. To compare the costs and effectiveness of the medical treatment group with the 3 artificial liver treatment groups, a pharmacoeconomic cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted to assess the economic aspects.

Results: The effectiveness rate of the PE + DPMAS group was 76.9%, which was significantly higher than that of the PE and DPMAS group (P < .05). The effectiveness rate of the PE group was similar to that of the DPMAS group (P > .05). The effectiveness rate in all 3 artificial liver treatment groups was higher than that of the medical treatment group (P < .05). The total cost per person was RMB 54,661.6, RMB 61,385.5, RMB 71,789.2, and RMB 65,945.7 in the medical treatment, and the artificial liver PE group, DPMAS, and PE + DPMAS groups, respectively. The cost-effectiveness ratio (C/E) was 2009.6, 1162.6, 1511.4, and 758.9, respectively. The sensitivity analysis results for costs were consistent with the cost-effectiveness analysis results.

Conclusions: The artificial liver treatment group demonstrated a superior "performance-cost ratio," with the PE + DPMAS group being the most effective. This combination can be considered the optimal treatment for acute-on-chronic liver failure when combined with appropriate drug therapy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信