Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness in extracorporeal life support in critically ill adults in the Netherlands.

ABSTRACT: Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is used to support the cardiorespiratory function in case of severe cardiac and/or respiratory failure in critically ill patients. According to the ELSO guidelines ECLS should be considered when estimated mortality risk approximates 80%. ECLS seems an efficient therapy in terms of survival benefit, but no undisputed evidence is delivered yet. The aim of the study is to assess the health-related quality of life after ECLS treatment and its cost effectiveness.We will perform a prospective observational cohort study. All adult patients who receive ECLS in the participating centers will be included. Exclusion criteria are patients in whom the ECLS is only used to bridge a procedure (like a high risk percutaneous coronary intervention or surgery) or the absence of informed consent. Data collection includes patient characteristics and data specific for ECLS treatment. Severity of illness and mortality risk is measured as precisely as possible using measurements for the appropriate age group and organ failure. For analyses on survival patients will act as their own control as we compare the actual survival with the estimated mortality on initiation of ECLS if conservative treatment would have been continued. Survivors are asked to complete validated questionnaires on health related quality of life (EQ5D-5 L) and on medical consumption and productivity losses (iMTA/iPCQ) at 6 and 12 months. Also the health related quality of life 1 month prior to ECLS initiation will be obtained by a questionnaire, if needed provided by relatives. With an estimated overall survival of 62% 210 patients need to be recruited to make a statement on cost effectiveness for all ECLS indications.If our hypothesis that ECLS treatment is cost-effective is confirmed by this prospective study this could lead to an even broader use of ECLS treatment.The trial is registered at ( NCT02837419 ) registration date July 19, 2016 and with the Dutch trial register, http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=6599.

SUBMITTER: Oude Lansink-Hartgring A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5845153 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-effectiveness in extracorporeal life support in critically ill adults in the Netherlands.

Oude Lansink-Hartgring Annemieke A Dos Reis Miranda Dinis D Donker Dirk W DW Maas Jacinta J JJ Delnoij Thijs T Kuijpers Marijn M van den Brule Judith J Scholten Erik E Endeman Hendrik H Vlaar Alexander P J APJ van den Bergh Walter M WM

BMC health services research 20180309 1

<h4>Background</h4>Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is used to support the cardiorespiratory function in case of severe cardiac and/or respiratory failure in critically ill patients. According to the ELSO guidelines ECLS should be considered when estimated mortality risk approximates 80%. ECLS seems an efficient therapy in terms of survival benefit, but no undisputed evidence is delivered yet. The aim of the study is to assess the health-related quality of life after ECLS treatment and its cos ...[more]

PMID: 29523153

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFerritin is the major iron storage protein and an acute phase reactant. Hyperferritinemia is frequently seen in the critically ill where it has been hypothesized that not only underlying conditions but also factors such as transfusions, hemodialysis and extracorporeal life support (ECLS) lead to hyperferritinemia. This study aims to investigate the influence of transfusions, hemodialysis, and ECLS on hyperferritinemia in a multidisciplinary ICU cohort.MethodsThis is a post-hoc analysis of a retrospective observational study including patients aged ≥ 18 years who were admitted to at least one adult ICU between January 2006 and August 2018 with hyperferritinemia ≥ 500 μg/L and of ≥ 14 days between two ICU ferritin measurements. Patients with hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) were excluded. To identify the influence of transfusions, hemodialysis, and ECLS on ferritin change, multivariable linear regression analysis with ferritin change between two measurements as dependent variable was performed.ResultsA total of 268 patients was analyzed. Median duration between measurements was 36 days (22-57). Over all patients, ferritin significantly increased between the first and last measurement (p = 0.006). Multivariable linear regression analysis showed no effect of transfusions, hemodialysis, or ECLS on ferritin change. Changes in aspartate aminotransferase (ASAT) and sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score were identified as influencing factors on ferritin change [unstandardized regression coefficient (B) = 2.6; (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.9, 3.3); p < 0.001 and B = 376.5; (95% CI 113.8, 639.1); p = 0.005, respectively]. Using the same model for subgroups of SOFA score, we found SOFA platelet count to be associated with ferritin change [B = 1729.3; (95% CI 466.8, 2991.9); p = 0.007]. No association of ferritin change and in-hospital mortality was seen in multivariable analysis.ConclusionsThe present study demonstrates that transfusions, hemodialysis, and ECLS had no influence on ferritin increases in critically ill patients. Hyperferritinemia appears to be less the result of iatrogenic influences in the ICU thereby underscoring its unskewed diagnostic value.Trial registrationThe study was registered with www.ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02854943) on August 1, 2016.

Project description:Background: Systemic inflammation is a whole body reaction that can have an infection-positive (i.e. sepsis) or infection-negative origin. It is important to distinguish between septic and non-septic presentations early and reliably, because this has significant therapeutic implications for critically ill patients. We hypothesized that a molecular classifier based on a small number of RNAs expressed in peripheral blood could be discovered that would: 1) determine which patients with systemic inflammation had sepsis; 2) be robust across independent patient cohorts; 3) be insensitive to disease severity; and 4) provide diagnostic utility. The overall goal of this study was to identify and validate such a molecular classifier. Methods and Findings: We conducted an observational, non-interventional study of adult patients recruited from tertiary intensive care units (ICU). Biomarker discovery was conducted with an Australian cohort (n = 105) consisting of sepsis patients and post -surgical patients with infection-negative systemic inflammation. Using this cohort, a four-gene classifier consisting of a combination of CEACAM4, LAMP1, PLA2G7 and PLAC8 RNA biomarkers was identified. This classifier, designated SeptiCyteÂ® Lab, was externally validated using RT-qPCR and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis in five cohorts (n = 345) from the Netherlands. Cohort 1 (n=59) consisted of unambiguous septic cases and infection-negative systemic inflammation controls; SeptiCyteÂ® Lab gave an area under curve (AUC) of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.91-1.00). ROC analysis of a more heterogeneous group of patients (Cohorts 2-5; 249 patients after excluding 37 patients with infection likelihood possible) gave an AUC of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.85-0.93). Disease severity, as measured by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score or the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV score, was not a significant confounding variable. The diagnostic utility o f SeptiCyteÂ® Lab was evaluated by comparison to various clinical and laboratory parameters that would be available to a clinician within 24 hours of ICU admission. SeptiCyteÂ® Lab was significantly better at differentiating sepsis from infection-negative systemic inflammation than all tested parameters, both singly and in various logistic combinations. SeptiCyteÂ® Lab more than halved the diagnostic error rate compared to PCT in all tested cohorts or cohort combinations. Conclusions: SeptiCyteÂ® Lab is a rapid molecular assay that may be clinically useful in the management of ICU patients with systemic inflammation. SIRS and Sepsis ICU patients, admission samples Retrospective, mutli-site sutdy using retrospective physician adjudication as a comparator

Project description:Background: Systemic inflammation is a whole body reaction that can have an infection-positive (i.e. sepsis) or infection-negative origin. It is important to distinguish between septic and non-septic presentations early and reliably, because this has significant therapeutic implications for critically ill patients. We hypothesized that a molecular classifier based on a small number of RNAs expressed in peripheral blood could be discovered that would: 1) determine which patients with systemic inflammation had sepsis; 2) be robust across independent patient cohorts; 3) be insensitive to disease severity; and 4) provide diagnostic utility. The overall goal of this study was to identify and validate such a molecular classifier. Methods and Findings: We conducted an observational, non-interventional study of adult patients recruited from tertiary intensive care units (ICU). Biomarker discovery was conducted with an Australian cohort (n = 105) consisting of sepsis patients and post -surgical patients with infection-negative systemic inflammation. Using this cohort, a four-gene classifier consisting of a combination of CEACAM4, LAMP1, PLA2G7 and PLAC8 RNA biomarkers was identified. This classifier, designated SeptiCyte® Lab, was externally validated using RT-qPCR and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis in five cohorts (n = 345) from the Netherlands. Cohort 1 (n=59) consisted of unambiguous septic cases and infection-negative systemic inflammation controls; SeptiCyte® Lab gave an area under curve (AUC) of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.91-1.00). ROC analysis of a more heterogeneous group of patients (Cohorts 2-5; 249 patients after excluding 37 patients with infection likelihood possible) gave an AUC of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.85-0.93). Disease severity, as measured by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score or the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV score, was not a significant confounding variable. The diagnostic utility o f SeptiCyte® Lab was evaluated by comparison to various clinical and laboratory parameters that would be available to a clinician within 24 hours of ICU admission. SeptiCyte® Lab was significantly better at differentiating sepsis from infection-negative systemic inflammation than all tested parameters, both singly and in various logistic combinations. SeptiCyte® Lab more than halved the diagnostic error rate compared to PCT in all tested cohorts or cohort combinations. Conclusions: SeptiCyte® Lab is a rapid molecular assay that may be clinically useful in the management of ICU patients with systemic inflammation. SIRS and Sepsis ICU patients, admission samples

Project description:Disturbed oxygenation is foremost the leading clinical presentation in COVID-19 patients. However, a small proportion also develop carbon dioxide removal problems. The Advanced Organ Support (ADVOS) therapy (ADVITOS GmbH, Munich, Germany) uses a less invasive approach by combining extracorporeal CO2 -removal and multiple organ support for the liver and the kidneys in a single hemodialysis device. The aim of our study is to evaluate the ADVOS system as treatment option in-COVID-19 patients with multi-organ failure and carbon dioxide removal problems. COVID-19 patients suffering from severe respiratory insufficiency, receiving at least two treatments with the ADVOS multi system (ADVITOS GmbH, Munich, Germany), were eligible for study inclusion. Briefly, these included patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) according to KDIGO guidelines, and moderate or severe ARDS according to the Berlin definition, who were on invasive mechanical ventilation for more than 72 hours. In total, nine COVID-19 patients (137 ADVOS treatment sessions with a median of 10 treatments per patient) with moderate to severe ARDS and carbon dioxide removal problems were analyzed. During the ADVOS treatments, a rapid correction of acid-base balance and a continuous CO2 removal could be observed. We observed a median continuous CO2 removal of 49.2 mL/min (IQR: 26.9-72.3 mL/min) with some treatments achieving up to 160 mL/min. The CO2 removal significantly correlated with blood flow (Pearson 0.421; P < .001), PaCO2 (0.341, P < .001) and HCO3- levels (0.568, P < .001) at the start of the treatment. The continuous treatment led to a significant reduction in PaCO2 from baseline to the last ADVOS treatment. In conclusion, it was feasible to remove CO2 using the ADVOS system in our cohort of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome and multiorgan failure. This efficient removal of CO2 was achieved at blood flows up to 300 mL/min using a conventional hemodialysis catheter and without a membrane lung or a gas phase.

Project description:BackgroundProcalcitonin (PCT) testing can help in safely reducing antibiotic treatment duration in intensive care patients with sepsis. However, the cost-effectiveness of such PCT guidance is not yet known.MethodsA trial-based analysis was performed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of PCT guidance compared with standard of care (without PCT guidance). Patient-level data were used from the SAPS trial in which 1546 patients were randomised. This trial was performed in the Netherlands, which is a country with, on average, low antibiotic use and a short duration of hospital stay. As quality of life among sepsis survivors was not measured during the SAPS, this was derived from a Dutch follow-up study. Outcome measures were (1) incremental direct hospital cost and (2) incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from a healthcare perspective over a one-year time horizon. Uncertainty in outcomes was assessed with bootstrapping.ResultsMean in-hospital costs were €46,081/patient in the PCT group compared with €46,146/patient with standard of care (i.e. -?€65 (95% CI -?€6314 to €6107); -?0.1%). The duration of the first course of antibiotic treatment was lower in the PCT group with 6.9 vs. 8.2 days (i.e. -?1.2 days (95% CI -?1.9 to -?0.4), -?14.8%). This was accompanied by lower in-hospital mortality of 21.8% vs. 29.8% (absolute decrease 7.9% (95% CI -?13.9% to -?1.8%), relative decrease 26.6%), resulting in an increase in mean QALYs/patient from 0.47 to 0.52 (i.e.?+?0.05 (95% CI 0.00 to 0.10); +?10.1%). However, owing to high costs among sepsis survivors, healthcare costs over a one-year time horizon were €73,665/patient in the PCT group compared with €70,961/patient with standard of care (i.e.?+?€2704 (95% CI -?€4495 to €10,005), +?3.8%), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €57,402/QALY gained. Within this time frame, the probability of PCT guidance being cost-effective was 64% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €80,000/QALY.ConclusionsAlthough the impact of PCT guidance on total healthcare-related costs during the initial hospitalisation episode is likely negligible, the lower in-hospital mortality may lead to a non-significant increase in costs over a one-year time horizon. However, since uncertainty remains, it is recommended to investigate the long-term cost-effectiveness of PCT guidance, from a societal perspective, in different countries and settings.

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness in extracorporeal life support in critically ill adults in the Netherlands.

Publications

Cost-effectiveness in extracorporeal life support in critically ill adults in the Netherlands.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets