Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T11:29:26.077Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Two Strategies For Prophylaxis of Fatal Postoperative Pulmonary Embolism

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Steven D. Hilson  and
Eugene C. Rich
Steven D. Hilson
Affiliation:
University of Minnesota
Eugene C. Rich
Affiliation:
University of Kentucky
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

While subcutaneous heparin is a standard prophylaxis for death from pulmonary embolism following general surgery, it has been suggested that adding the vasoconstricting drug dihydroergotamine would improve survival compared to heparin alone. Dihydroergotamine may be associated with rare but life-threatening side effects; thus, reduced mortality from pulmonary embolism could be offset by increased mortality from other causes. Because a clinical trial to examine this possibility would be impractical, we performed a cost-effectiveness analysis to evaluate the effects of prophylactic dihydroergotamine on mortality. Based on published data, despite its favorable effects on the prevention of deep vein thrombosis, the addition of dihydroergotamine did not appear to save lives when added to heparin as prophylaxis. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that even if published risk estimates are in error, substantial changes would still not support the conclusion that dihydroergotamine is lifesaving. In the absence of clear potential for improved survival, the increased costs associated with dihydroergotamine provide reason to question its routine prophylactic use in general surgery.

Type
General Essays
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , April 1990 , pp. 470 - 479
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Barone, J. A., Raia, J. J., & Levy, D. B.Combination dihydroergotamine mesylate and heparin sodium with lidocaine HCI. Pharmacotherapy,1986, 6(Suppl.), 3S–11S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Bell, W. R., & Simon, T. L.Current status of pulmonary thromboembolic disease: Pathophysiology, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment. American Heart Journal, 1982, 103, 239–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Bell, W. R., & Zuidema, G. D.Low-dose heparin — concern and perspectives. Surgery, 1979, 85, 469–71.Google Scholar
4.Colman, R. W., & Rubin, R. N.Update on pulmonary embolism — modern management. Disease-a-Month, 1982, 29, 7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Comerota, A. J., Stewart, G. J., & White, J. V.Combined dihydroergotamine and heparin prophylaxis of postoperative deep-vein thrombosis: Proposed mechanism of action. American Journal of Surgery, 1985, 150(Suppl. 4A), 39–44.Google ScholarPubMed
6.Comerota, A. J. et al. , Prophylactic efficacy of low-dose dihydroergotamine and heparin in postoperative deep venous thrombosis following intra-abdominal operations. Journal of Vascular Surgery, 1984, 1, 608–16.Google Scholar
7. Consensus Conference: Prevention of venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1986, 256, 744–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Coon, W. W., & Willis, P. W.Hemorrhagic complications of anticoagulant therapy. Archives of Internal Medicine, 1974, 133, 386–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Critchfield, G. C., & Willard, K. E.Probabilistic analysis of decision trees using Monte Carlo simulation. Medical Decision Making, 1986,6, 85–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Vital and Health Statistics. Hyattsville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, #(PHS)87–1749, 8–18.Google Scholar
11. Dihydroergotamine-heparin to prevent postoperative deep vein thrombosis. Medical Letter, 1985, 27, 45–46.Google Scholar
12.DiSerio, F. J., & Sasahara, A. A.United States trial of dihydroergotamine and heparin prophylaxis of deep vein thrombosis. American Journal of Surgery, 1985, 150(Suppl. 4a), 25–32.Google ScholarPubMed
13.Gent, M., & Roberts, R. S.A meta-analysis of the studies of dihydroergotamine plus heparin in the prophylaxis of deep vein thrombosis. Chest, 1986, 89(Suppl.), 396S–400S.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Gilman, A. G., Goodman, L. S., Rall, T. W. et al. ,The pharmacologic basis of medical therapeutics. New York: Macmillan, 1985, 931–40.Google Scholar
15.Goldhaber, S. Z.Pulmonary embolism and deep venous thrombosis. Philadelphia, PA: W. B. Saunders, 1985, 91.Google Scholar
16.Goldhaber, S. Z., Buring, J. E., Lipnick, R. J. et al. , Pooled analyses of randomized trials of streptokinase and heparin in phlebographically documented acute deep venous thrombosis. American Journal of Medicine, 1984, 76, 393–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Gruber, U. F. Prevention of fatal postoperative pulmonary embolism by heparin dihydroergotamine or Dextran 70. British Journal of Surgery 1982, 69(Suppl.), S54–S58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Gruber, U. F., Rem, J., Meisner, C. et al. , Prevention of thromboembolic complications with miniheparin-dihydroergotamine in patients undergoing lumbar disc operations. European Archives of Psychiatry and Neurological Sciences, 1984, 234, 157–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19.Haeger, K.Problems of acute deep venous thrombosis. Angiology, 1969, 20, 219–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Hirsh, J.New approaches for deep vein thrombosis occurring after surgery. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1984, 251, 2985–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21.Hull, R., Delmore, T., Carter, C. et al. , Adjusted subcutaneous heparin versus warfarin sodium in the long-term treatment of venous thrombosis. New England Journal of Medicine, 1982, 306, 189–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22.Hull, R., Delmore, T., Genton, E. et al. , Warfarin sodium versus low-dose heparin in the long-term treatment of venous thrombosis. New England Journal of Medicine, 1979, 301, 855–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.Hull, R., & Hirsh, J.Advances and controversies in the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of venous thromboembolism. Progress in Hematology,1981, 12, 73–123.Google ScholarPubMed
24.Hull, R., Hirsh, J., Sackett, D. L. et al. , Cost effectiveness of clinical diagnosis, venography, and non-invasive testing in patients with symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis. New England Journal of Medicine, 1981, 304, 1561–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Kakkar, V. V.Ergotism and heparin-dihydroergotamine. Lancet, 1982, ii, 96–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Kakkar, V. V., Corrigan, T. P., Fossard, D. P. et al. , Prevention of fatal postoperative pulmonary embolism by low doses of heparin. Lancet, 1975, ii, 45–51.Google Scholar
27.Kakkar, V. V., Stamatakis, J. D., Bentley, P. G. et al. , Prophylaxis for postoperative deepvein thrombosis. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1979, 241, 39–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28.Kakkar, V. V., Welzel, D., Murray, W. J. G. et al. , Possible mechanism of the synergistic effect of heparin and dihydroergotamine. American Journal of Surgery, 1985, 150(Suppl. 4A), 33–38.Google ScholarPubMed
29.Lahnborg, G., Bergstrom, K., Friman, L. et al. , Effect of low-dose heparin on incidence of postoperative pulmonary embolism detected by photoscanning. Lancet, 1974, i, 329–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.Milholland, A. V., Wheeler, S. G., Heieck, J. J.Medical assessment by a Delphi group opinion technic. New England Journal of Medicine, 1973, 288, 1272–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
31.Monreal, M., Foz, M., Ubierna, M. T. et al. , Skin and muscle necrosis during heparindihydroergotamine prophylaxis. Lancet, 1984, ii, 820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32.Morris, W. T., & Hardy, A. E.The effect of dihydroergotamine and heparin on the incidence of thromboembolic complications following total hip replacement: A randomized clinical trial. British Journal of Surgery, 1981, 68, 301–03.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33.Moser, G., Krahenbuhl, B., Barroussel, R. et al. , Mechanical versus pharmacologic prevention of deep venous thrombosis. Surgery, Gynecology, and Obstetrics, 1981, 152, 448–50.Google ScholarPubMed
34.Moser, K. M., & LeMoine, J. R.Is embolic risk conditioned by location of deep venous thrombosis? Annals of Internal Medicine, 1981, 94, 439–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
35.Nicolaides, A. N., Kakkar, V. V., Field, E. S. et al. , The origin of deep vein thrombosis: A venographic study. British Journal of Radiology, 1971, 44, 653–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
36.Norris, C. S., Greenfield, L. J., & Herrmann, J. B.Free-floating ileofemoral thrombus. Archives of Surgery, 1985, 120, 806–08.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37.Oster, G., Tuden, R. L., & Colditz, G. A.A cost effectiveness analysis of prophylaxis against deep-vein thrombosis in major orthopedic surgery.Journal of the American Medical Association, 1987, 257, 203–08.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
38.Oster, G., Tuden, R. L., & Colditz, G. A.Prevention of venous thromboembolism after general surgery. American Journal of Medicine, 1987, 82, 889–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
39.Pauker, S. G., & Kassirer, J. P.Clinical decision analysis by personal computer. Archives of Internal Medicine, 1981, 141, 1831–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
40.Pedersen, B., & Christiansen, J.Thromboembolic prophylaxis with dihydroergotamine heparin in abdominal surgery. American Journal of Surgery, 1983, 145, 788–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
41.Sagar, S., Stamatakis, J. D., Higgins, A. F. et al. Efficacy of low-dose heparin in prevention of extensive deep-vein thrombosis in patients undergoing total-hip replacement. Lancet, 1976, i, 1151–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
42.Sasahara, A. A. et al. , Dihydroergotamine-heparin prophylaxis of postoperative deep vein thrombosis. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1984, 251, 2960–66.Google Scholar
43.Sharma, G. V. R. K., & Sasahara, A. A.Diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary embolism. Medical Clinics of North America, 1979, 63, 239–50.Google ScholarPubMed
44.Shepard, R. M., White, H. A., & Shirkey, A. L.Anticoagulant prophylaxis of thromboembolism in postsurgical patients. American Journal of Surgery, 1966, 112, 698–702.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
45.Skinner, D. B., & Salzman, E. W.Anticoagulant prophylaxis in surgical patients. Surgery, Gynecology, and Obstetrics, 1967, 125, 741–46.Google ScholarPubMed
46.Urokinase Pulmonary Embolism Trial Study Group.Urokinase pulmonary embolism trial phase 1 results. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1970, 214, 2163–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
47.Van, den Berg E., Walterbusch, G., Gotzen, L. et al. , Ergotism leading to threatened limb amputation or to death in two patients given heparin-dihydroergotamine prophylaxis. Lancet, 1982, i, 955–56.Google Scholar
48.Wille-Jorgensen, P., Kjaergaard, J., Thorup, J. et al. , Heparin with and without dihydroergotamine in prevention of thromboembolic complications of major abdominal surgery. Archives of Surgery, 1983, 118, 926–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed