Journal
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Volume 28, Issue 3, Pages 345-351Publisher
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MEG.0000000000000537
Keywords
economic evaluation; terlipressin; noradrenaline; systematic review; hepatorenal syndrome
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Objective The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and costs of terlipressin and noradrenaline for the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome from the perspective of the Brazilian public health system and that of a major private health insurance. Methods Comparison of efficacy was performed through a systematic review with a meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials using a random-effects model. Economic evaluation was carried out through cost minimization. Results Four studies (154 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. There was no evidence of a difference between treatments with terlipressin or noradrenaline in terms of 30-day survival (risk ratio=1.04, 95% confidence interval=0.84-1.30, P=0.70). From the perspective of the public health system, costs of the treatments with terlipressin or noradrenaline were Int$7437.04 and Int$8406.41, respectively. From the perspective of the private health insurance, costs of treatments with terlipressin and noradrenaline were Int$13 484.57 and Int$15 061.01, respectively. Conclusion There was no evidence of superiority between treatment strategies using terlipressin or noradrenaline in terms of the survival of patients with hepatorenal syndrome, but the strategy using terlipressin was more economical under two different perspectives.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available