| Popis: |
Despite recent data suggesting improved outcomes with bivalirudin vs heparin in pediatric Ventricular assist devices (VAD), higher costs remain a barrier. This study quantified trends in bivalirudin use and compared outcomes, resource utilization, and cost-effectiveness associated with bivalirudin vs heparin.Children age 0 to 6 year who received VAD from 2009 to 2021 were identified in Pediatric Health Information System. Bivalirudin use was evaluated using trend analysis and outcomes were compared using Fine-Gray subdistrubtion hazard ratios (SHR). Daily-level hospital costs were compared due to differences in length of stay. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).Of 691 pediatric VAD recipients (median age 1 year, IQR 0-2), 304 (44%) received bivalirudin with 90% receiving bivalirudin in 2021 (trend p-value0.01). Bivalirudin had lower hospital mortality (26% vs 32%; adjusted SHR 0.57, 95% CI 0.40-0.83) driven by lower VAD mortality (20% vs 27%; adjusted SHR 0.46, 95% CI 0.32-0.77) after adjusting for year, age, diagnosis, and center VAD volume. Post-VAD length of stay was longer for bivalirudin than heparin (median 91 vs 64 days, respectively, p0.001). Median daily-level costs were lower among bivalirudin (cost ratio 0.87, 95% CI 0.79-0.96) with higher pharmacy costs offset by lower imaging, laboratory, supply, and room/board costs. Estimated ICER for bivalirudin vs heparin was $61,192 per quality-adjusted life year gained with a range of $27,673 to $131,243.Bivalirudin use significantly increased over the past decade and is now used in 90% young pediatric VAD recipients. Bivalirudin was associated with significantly lower hospital mortality and an ICER$65,000, making it a cost-effective therapy for pediatric VAD recipients. |
