大血管闭塞卒中取栓联合或不联合阿替普酶的成本效益:考虑治疗时间的Meta分析
该研究整合6项试验的个体患者数据,采用决策树-Markov模型评估16个国家中直接就诊于取栓中心的前循环大血管闭塞患者,静脉阿替普酶联合取栓与单纯取栓的成本效益,并按发病至静脉溶栓时间分层。结果显示联合治疗的成本效益随发病至静脉溶栓时间延长而递减,<170分钟时在16国均具有成本效益,≥200分钟时增量净货币效益普遍为负。
要点
- 发病至静脉溶栓<140分钟时,联合治疗在16国均具成本效益(INMB $615-$30,645)。
- 发病至静脉溶栓140-169分钟时,联合治疗在16国仍具成本效益(INMB $86-$16,918)。
- 发病至静脉溶栓≥200分钟时,联合治疗的增量净货币效益普遍为负。
核心结论
- 静脉阿替普酶联合取栓的成本效益因国家和发病至静脉溶栓时间而异,170分钟内给药具成本效益,超过200分钟则有害。
研究设计与样本
- 决策树整合Markov模型,评估15年成本、质量调整生命年(QALY)和增量净货币效益(INMB)。
- 效果数据来自6项试验的个体患者数据,共2,268例前循环大血管闭塞且适合静脉溶栓和取栓、直接就诊于取栓中心的患者。
- 成本来自文献回顾,支付意愿阈值采用各国人均国内生产总值。
- 发病至静脉溶栓时间分为<140、140-169、170-199和≥200分钟四组。
- 进行单因素敏感性和概率敏感性分析验证稳健性。
主要发现
- 未按时间分层时,联合治疗在13国看似具成本效益(INMB $85-$3,618;成本效益概率50-65%),在美国、中国和越南不具成本效益,每患者健康获益0.06-0.08 QALY。
- 发病至静脉溶栓<140分钟时,联合治疗在16国均具成本效益(INMB $615-$30,645;概率82%-98%)。
- 发病至静脉溶栓140-169分钟时,联合治疗在16国均具成本效益(INMB $86-$16,918;概率51%-77%)。
- 发病至静脉溶栓170-199分钟时,联合治疗在8国不再具成本效益。
- 发病至静脉溶栓≥200分钟时,所有国家的INMB均为负。
关键数值与推荐
- 成本效益判定阈值:各国人均国内生产总值。
- 发病至静脉溶栓<140分钟:INMB $615-$30,645,成本效益概率82%-98%。
- 发病至静脉溶栓140-169分钟:INMB $86-$16,918,成本效益概率51%-77%。
- 发病至静脉溶栓170-199分钟:8国不再具成本效益。
- 发病至静脉溶栓≥200分钟:所有国家INMB为负。
临床怎么用
- 对于直接就诊于取栓中心的大血管闭塞卒中患者,应尽可能在发病170分钟内启动静脉阿替普酶联合取栓以保障成本效益。
- 发病至静脉溶栓超过200分钟时,联合治疗不再具成本效益,决策需结合临床实际。
- 成本效益结论需考虑国家经济水平差异,不能一概而论。
以上解读依据论文摘要(全文未开放获取或许可不允许翻译转载)。
原文
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In stroke patients directly admitted to thrombectomy-capable centers, the value of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) with alteplase before thrombectomy is time dependent. While early IVT may improve outcomes, delayed IVT administration lowers the likelihood of benefit. To date, no previous cost-effectiveness study has considered onset-to-treatment time. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of intravenous (IV) alteplase plus thrombectomy vs thrombectomy alone in patients admitted directly to thrombectomy-capable centers across 16 countries, stratified by onset-to-IVT time. METHODS: A decision tree integrated with a Markov model estimated costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) over 15 years. A willingness-to-pay threshold of one gross domestic product per capita was applied for each country. Effectiveness data were derived from individual patient data from 6 trials including patients with anterior circulation large-vessel occlusion eligible for both IVT and thrombectomy who presented directly to thrombectomy-capable centers. Costs were obtained from a literature review. Onset-to-IVT time was categorized as <140, 140-169, 170-199, and ≥200 minutes. One-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to check robustness of results. RESULTS: Ninety-day functional outcome distributions from 2,268 patients (median age 71 years; 44% female) were used to model cost-effectiveness in a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 patients. Without accounting for onset-to-IVT time, IV alteplase plus thrombectomy seemed cost-effective in 13 countries (INMB: $85-$3,618; 50-65% probability of cost-effectiveness) and not cost-effective in the United States, China, and Vietnam, with modest health gains (0.06-0.08 QALYs per patient). Time-stratified analyses revealed that IVT plus thrombectomy was cost-effective in 16 countries when onset-to-IVT time was <140 minutes (INMB: $615-$30,645; 82%-98% probability) and at 140-169 minutes (INMB: $86-$16,918; 51%-77% probability). However, IV alteplase plus thrombectomy was no longer cost-effective in 8 countries at 170-199 minutes. Universally, the INMB was negative for onset-to-IVT times exceeding 200 minutes. DISCUSSION: Cost-effectiveness of IV alteplase plus thrombectomy varies per country and onset-to-IVT time. IV alteplase plus thrombectomy is cost-effective when IVT can be administered within 170 minutes from symptom onset. Cost-effectiveness of IV alteplase plus thrombectomy diminishes progressively with longer onset-to-IVT times and becomes detrimental after 200 minutes.
引用
- Nguyen CP, Cavalcante F, van der Zee DJ, et al. Cost-Effectiveness of Thrombectomy With or Without Alteplase in Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke: A Meta-Analysis Considering Time-to-Treatment. Neurology. 2026. PMID: 41996656. doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000214866
供执业医师工作参考,不替代临床判断;数值与分级以指南原文为准。