Kudzoeva Z F
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the main mortality factor and the main reason of disability of the working-age population both in the Russian Federation and in the world. Due to the state statistical data, 1,878 persons per every 100,000 population died in Russia in 2014. 50.1 % of these deaths have been caused by CVD and more than half of them (52.3 %) have been caused by ischemic heart disease (IHD). The aim of this study was to determine the preferential scheme of medical therapy in perioperative management of cardiac surgery patients with extracorporeal circulation, with IHD or with chronic heart insufficiency (CHI) from the point of view of pharmacoeconomic analysis by comparing ratios between expenses and efficacy, safety and quality of life associated with the use of Neoton (phosphocreatine) in comparison with the control group. Due to the efficacy analysis, the scheme “standard therapy + phophocreatine” is more effective. Cost-effectiveness analysis has shown that the standard therapy + phosphocreatine is a preferable method of treatment in comparison with the standard therapy as it shows better clinical efficacy and lower “costeffectiveness ratio. Results of the budget impact analysis have shown that the use of the standard therapy + phosphocreatine instead of the standard therapy itself in perioperative management of cardiac surgery patients with extracorporeal circulation, with IHD or with CHI has saved money.
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the main mortality factor and the main reason of disability of the working-age population both in the Russian Federation and in the world. Due to the state statistical data, 1,878 persons per every 100,000 population died in Russia in 2014. 50.1 % of these deaths have been caused by CVD and more than half of them (52.3 %) have been caused by ischemic heart disease (IHD). The aim of this study was to determine the preferential scheme of medical therapy in perioperative management of cardiac surgery patients with extracorporeal circulation, with IHD or with chronic heart insufficiency (CHI) from the point of view of pharmacoeconomic analysis by comparing ratios between expenses and efficacy, safety and quality of life associated with the use of Neoton (phosphocreatine) in comparison with the control group. Due to the efficacy analysis, the scheme “standard therapy + phophocreatine” is more effective. Cost-effectiveness analysis has shown that the standard therapy + phosphocreatine is a preferable method of treatment in comparison with the standard therapy as it shows better clinical efficacy and lower “costeffectiveness ratio. Results of the budget impact analysis have shown that the use of the standard therapy + phosphocreatine instead of the standard therapy itself in perioperative management of cardiac surgery patients with extracorporeal circulation, with IHD or with CHI has saved money.