↓ Skip to main content

Cost-effectiveness of a high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T systematic screening strategy compared with usual care to identify patients with peri-operative myocardial injury after major noncardiac…

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Anaesthesiology, January 2023
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Cost-effectiveness of a high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T systematic screening strategy compared with usual care to identify patients with peri-operative myocardial injury after major noncardiac surgery
Published in
European Journal of Anaesthesiology, January 2023
DOI 10.1097/eja.0000000000001793
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ekaterine Popova, Pablo Alonso-Coello, Jesús Álvarez-García, Pilar Paniagua-Iglesias, Montserrat Rué-Monné, Miguel Vives-Borrás, Adria Font-Gual, Ignasi Gich-Saladich, Cecilia Martínez-Bru, Jordi Ordóñez-Llanos, Misericordia Carles-Lavila

Abstract

About 300 million surgeries are performed worldwide annually and this figure is increasing constantly. Peri-operative myocardial injury (PMI), detected by cardiac troponin (cTn) elevation, is a common cardiac complication of noncardiac surgery, strongly associated with short- and long-term mortality. Without systematic peri-operative cTn screening, most cases of PMI may go undetected. However, little is known about cost effectiveness of a systematic PMI screening strategy with high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) after noncardiac surgery. To assess, in patients with high cardiovascular risk, the cost-effectiveness of a systematic screening strategy using a hs-cTnT assay, to identify patients with PMI after major noncardiac surgery, compared with usual care. Cost-effectiveness analysis; single centre prospective cohort study. Spanish University Hospital. From July 2016 to March 2019, we included 1477 consecutive surgical patients aged ≥65 or if <65, with documented history of cardiovascular disease or impaired renal function, who underwent major noncardiac surgery and required at least an overnight hospital stay. We excluded patients aged <65 years without cardiovascular disease, undergoing minor surgery, or with an expected <24 h hospital stays. We conducted a decision-tree analysis, comparing a systematic screening strategy measuring hs-cTnT before surgery, and at the 2nd and 3rd days after surgery vs. a usual care strategy. We considered a third-party payer perspective and the outcomes of both strategies in the short-term (30 days follow-up). Information about costs was expressed in Euros-2021. We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the systematic hs-cTnT strategy, defined as the expected cost per any additional PMI detected, and explored the robustness of the model using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. ICER of the systematic hs-cTnT screening strategy. The ICER was €425 per any additionally detected PMI. The deterministic sensitivity analysis showed that a 15% variation in costs, and a 1% variation in the predictive values, had a minor impact over the ICER, except in case of the negative predictive value of the systematic hs-cTnT screening strategy. Monte Carlo simulations (probabilistic sensitivity analysis) showed that systematic hs-cTnT screening would be cost-effective in 100% of cases with a 'willingness to pay' of €780. Our results suggest that systematic peri-operative PMI screening with hs-cTnT may be cost-effective in the short-term in patients undergoing major noncardiac surgery. Economic evaluations, with a long-term horizon, are still needed. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03438448.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Researcher 2 13%
Unspecified 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 3 20%
Unknown 4 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 33%
Unspecified 1 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Computer Science 1 7%
Unknown 7 47%