ligenpres

In lifesaving procedures to open blocked heart arteries a key question has persisted for years: Is use of the more expensive drug, abciximab, justified over use of the less-expensive eptifibatide?

A new Mayo Clinic study to be published in Value in Health Volume 11, Issue 4 and now available as an e-publication, offers clinicians the first large-scale contemporary study to help answer the question. The study found no significant difference between the drugs in the length of hospital stay or in the rate of adverse cardiovascular event.

"Our results provide data to show using the lower cost drug does not jeopardize patient health in contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention practice," explains the study's lead author, Kirsten Hall Long PhD. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), also known as angioplasty, is a procedure in which a balloon-tipped catheter is inserted into the narrowed vessel. The balloon is inflated and improves blood flow.

Researchers reviewed records of all Mayo Clinic patients who underwent PCI from November 2000 to August 2004. Of these, 2,123 patients received eptifibatide, and 951 received abciximab.

"It is not likely that there will ever be a randomized clinical trial comparing the two drugs, as it would require over 30,000 patients," says Henry Ting MD, Mayo Clinic cardiologist and co-author. "Our study fills an evidence gap by providing data to help guide treatment decisions."

Value in Health (ISSN 1098-3015) publishes papers, concepts, and ideas that advance the field of pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research and help health care leaders to make decisions that are solidly evidence-based. The journal is published bi-monthly and has a regular readership of over 3,000 clinicians, decision-makers, and researchers worldwide.

ISPOR is a nonprofit, international organization that strives to translate pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research into practice to ensure that society allocates scarce health care resources wisely, fairly, and efficiently.