Reducing emergency department visits in patients with deep vein thrombosis: introducing a standardised outpatient treatment pathway

Cost-Effectiveness of Performing Reference Ultrasonography in Patients with Deep Vein Thrombosis

BACKGROUND

 The diagnosis of recurrent ipsilateral deep vein thrombosis (DVT) with compression ultrasonography (CUS) may be hindered by residual intravascular obstruction after previous DVT. A reference CUS, an additional ultrasound performed at anticoagulant discontinuation, may improve the diagnostic work-up of suspected recurrent ipsilateral DVT by providing baseline images for future comparison.

OBJECTIVES

 To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of routinely performing reference CUS in DVT patients.

METHODS

 Patient-level data (n = 96) from a prospective management study (Theia study; NCT02262052) and claims data were used in a decision analytic model to compare 12 scenarios for diagnostic management of suspected recurrent ipsilateral DVT. Estimated health care costs and mortality due to misdiagnosis, recurrent venous thromboembolism, and bleeding during the first year of follow-up after presentation with suspected recurrence were compared.

RESULTS

 All six scenarios including reference CUS had higher estimated 1-year costs (€1,763-€1,913) than the six without reference CUS (€1,192-€1,474). Costs were higher because reference CUS results often remained unused, as 20% of patients (according to claims data) would return with suspected recurrent DVT. Estimated mortality was comparable in scenarios with (14.8-17.9 per 10,000 patients) and without reference CUS (14.0-18.5 per 10,000). None of the four potentially most desirable scenarios included reference CUS.

CONCLUSION

 One-year health care costs of diagnostic strategies for suspected recurrent ipsilateral DVT including reference CUS are higher compared to strategies without reference CUS, without mortality benefit. These results can inform policy-makers regarding use of health care resources during follow-up after DVT. From a cost-effectiveness perspective, the findings do not support the routine application of reference CUS.

Home Treatment of Patients with Pulmonary Embolism: A Single Center 10-Year Experience from Ljubljana Registry

Current guidelines suggest careful risk stratification using a structured clinical approach when selecting patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) for home treatment. The aim of our study was to assess whether PE patients referred to home treatment are appropriately risk-stratified according to guidelines prior to referral and what the real-life course of the disease in these patients is. We included patients with confirmed PE referred to outpatient management and treated with anticoagulants between 2010 and 2019, whose data were collected in a prospective management registry. Using simplified PE severity index and/or signs of right ventricular strain, we classified patients to either appropriate or inappropriate low-risk classes for outpatient management. We compared 30-day mortality, overall mortality, and rates of recurrent thromboembolism or major bleeding between both classes. Among 278 patients, 188 (67.6%) and 90 (32.4%) were classified as appropriate or inappropriate class, respectively. In total, 30-day mortality was low in both groups: 0% in appropriate class and 1.1% in inappropriate class. The overall mortality rate was higher in the inappropriate than in the appropriate class (12.1 vs 0.9/100 patient-years, respectively, P < .001). Rates of recurrent thromboembolism and major bleeding were similar for both classes. We conclude that in real-life, a significant proportion of inappropriate low-risk class PE patients are referred to outpatient management. However, with careful follow-up, early mortality is low, even in home-treated patients inappropriately classified as low-risk.