Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31773492›Full record

ArticleClinical drug investigation2020

A Caprini Risk Score-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Enoxaparin for the Thromboprophylaxis of Patients After Nonorthopedic Surgery in a Chinese Healthcare Setting.

Yun Bao, Gang Zhao, Shuli Qu, Tengbin Xiong, Xingxing Yao, Bin Wu

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Implementation failure: thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients with cancer.Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 2025
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Implementing guidelines to prevent cancer associated thrombosis: how can we do better?Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2023
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yun BaoDepartment of Pharmacy, Gansu Provincial Hospital, Gansu, China.
Gang ZhaoDepartment of General Surgery, Ren Ji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.
Shuli QuRWE Solution and HEOR, Quintiles IMS, Shanghai, China.
Tengbin XiongRWE Solution and HEOR, Quintiles IMS, Shanghai, China.
Xingxing YaoHEOR, Sanofi China, Shanghai, China.
Bin WuMedical Decision and Economic Group, Department of Pharmacy, Ren Ji Hospital, South Campus, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China. scilwsjtu-wb@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6696-7471
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · CNGansu Provincial Hospital · CNSanofi (China) · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVenous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is an important cause of post-surgery morbidity and mortality. However, it is unclear whether thromboprophylaxis with the low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) enoxaparin after non-orthopedic surgery could balance the cost and clinical outcomes or not.

objectivesThe purpose of this research was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of enoxaparin for the universal prophylaxis of VTE and associated long-term complications in patients after non-orthopedic surgery compared with no prevention in a Chinese healthcare setting.

methodsA decision model, which included both acute VTE and long-term complications, was developed to assess the economic outcomes of the two strategies for patients after non-orthopedic surgery. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and direct medical costs were measured over a 5-year horizon. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated.

resultsCompared with no prevention, patients under enoxaparin treatment with Caprini risk scores of 3-4, 5-6, 7-8, and ≥ 9 increased by 0.012, 0.017, 0.034, and 0.102 in QALYs, respectively. The results were either that ICERs of thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin over no prevention were lower than the thresholds or that thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin was dominant. For patients with a Caprini risk score ≥ 9, thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin is dominant across the whole drug use duration range. The sensitivity analysis confirmed the results.

conclusionsAs the first analysis evaluating the economic outcomes of enoxaparin in patients undergoing general non-orthopedic surgery, this study suggests that thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin is highly cost-effective compared with no prevention in patients with Caprini risk score ≥ 3.

Indexed as

AnticoagulantsCost-Benefit AnalysisEnoxaparinFemaleHumansPostoperative ComplicationsQuality-Adjusted Life YearsRiskVenous ThromboembolismAnticoagulantsEnoxaparin

Identifiers

PMID31773492
OpenAlexW2991134515

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.