1995 Anticoagulant treatment is often inadequate when administered in prevention of thrombotic complications before direct current cardioversion

AbstractIntroductionNewborn atrial flutter can be treated by medications, pacing, or direct current cardioversion. The purpose is to compare the cost-effectiveness of digoxin, pacing, and direct current cardioversion for the treatment of atrial flutter in neonates.Materials and methodsA decision tree model was developed comparing the efficacy and cost of digoxin, pacing, and direct current cardioversion based on a meta-analysis of published studies of success rates of cardioversion of neonatal atrial flutter (age<2 months). Patients who failed initial attempt at cardioversion progressed to the next methodology until successful. Data were analysed to assess the cost-effectiveness of these methods with cost estimates obtained from 2015 Medicare reimbursement rates.ResultsThe cost analysis for cardioversion of atrial flutter found the most efficient method to be direct current cardioversion at a cost of $10 304, pacing was next at $11 086, and the least cost-effective was digoxin at $14 374. The majority of additional cost, regardless of method, was from additional neonatal ICU day either owing to digoxin loading or failure to covert. Direct current cardioversion remains the most cost-effective strategy by sensitivity analyses performed on pacing conversion rate and the cost of the neonatal ICU/day. Direct current cardioversion remains cost-effective until the assumed conversion rate is below 64.6%.ConclusionThe most cost-efficient method of cardioverting a neonate with atrial flutter is direct current cardioversion. It has the highest success rates based on the meta-analysis, shorter length of stay in the neonatal ICU owing to its success, and results in cost-savings ranging from $800 to $4000 when compared with alternative approaches.

Download Full-text

THE THROMBOTIC COMPLICATIONS OF TWO GROUPS OF PATIENTS WITH DIFFERENT INR THERAPEUTIC RANGES. THE NECESSITY OF INTENSE ORAL ANTICOAGULANT TREATMENT

10.1055/s-0038-1643263 ◽

1987 ◽

Author(s):

Ir Kontopoulou-Griva ◽

J Spiliotopoulou ◽

L Digenopoulou ◽

J Georgopoulos

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Oral Anticoagulant ◽

Heart Valves ◽

Oral Anticoagulants ◽

Anticoagulant Treatment ◽

Oral Anticoagulant Treatment ◽

Daily Dose ◽

Group A ◽

Thrombotic Complications ◽

Group B

One of the reasons why oral anticoagulants fell into disrepute is the absence of internationally acceptable standarised procedures for controlling the level of anticoagulation. This deplorable situation resulted in over and under coagulation and uncertainty in the therapeutic range. The International Normalised Ratio (INR) can safely be applied in patients on oral anticoagulants.We present two Groups of patients under long term anti coagulation, mainly because of prosthetic heart valves that have recently been added to our outpatients clinic. These patients were till then attended by two cardiologists with different attitudes on the intensity of the anticoagulant treatment. The thromboplastin reagent used is that of ox origin and the results are expressed on INR.The Group A with 32 patients had at the time that we started attending them an INR x = 1,80 ± 0,48 and a daily dose of acenocoumarol x = 1,65 ± 0,51.The Group B with 49 patients had an INR x = 2,75 ± 0,51 and a daily dose of acenocoumarol x = 2,52 ± 1,53.Seven patients of the Group A referred thrombotic complications, while three patients of the Group B referred transiant thrombotic complications.The statistical analysis with the t-test of the INR between the two Groups is p<0,001 while that of the thrombotic complication with the x2 is p<0,05.The introduction of the INR and the acceptance by the medical people of the necessity of the intense oral anticoagulant treatment especially on high risk patients with mechanical heart valves as is the majority of the presented patients, will minimize the thromboembolic complications without high risk of bleeding.

Download Full-text