Clinical and economic outcomes in thrombolytic treatment of peripheral arterial occlusive disease and deep venous thrombosis

PURPOSE: Over the past 2 decades the use of thrombolytic therapy in the management of peripheral occlusive diseases, most notably peripheral arterial occlusion (PAO) and deep venous thrombosis (DVT), has become an accepted and potentially preferable alternative to surgery. We examined the period when urokinase was in short supply and subsequently unavailable, to explore potential differences in clinical outcome and economic effect between urokinase and recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data were obtained from the Premier Perspective Database, a broad clinical database that contains information on inpatient medical practices and resource use. The study population included all patients hospitalized in 1999 and 2000 with a primary or secondary diagnosis of PAO or DVT. Incidence was calculated for common adverse events, including bleeding complications, intracranial hemorrhage, amputation, and death. Cost data were also abstracted from the database, and are expressed as mean +/- SD. RESULTS: Demographic variables were similar in the urokinase and rt-PA groups. The rate of bleeding complications was similar in the urokinase and rt-PA groups. There were no intracranial hemorrhages in the urokinase group, compared with a rate of 1.5% in the rt-PA PAO group (P = .087) and 1.9% in the rt-PA DVT group (P = .175). The in-hospital mortality rate was lower in the urokinase-treated PAO subgroup (3.6% vs 8.5%; P = .026), but a similar finding in the DVT subgroup did not achieve statistical significance (4% vs 9.8%; P = .069). While pharmacy costs were greater in the urokinase-treated group (US 5472 dollars +/- US 5579 dollars vs US 3644 dollars +/- US 6009 dollars, P < .001; PAO subgroup, US 11,070 dollars +/- US 15,409 dollars vs US 6150 dollars +/- US 12,398 dollars, P = .003), overall hospital costs did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. This finding appears to be explained by a shorter hospital stay and reduced room and board costs in the urokinase-treated group. CONCLUSION: There were significant differences in outcome in patients with PAO and DVT who received treatment with urokinase and rt-PA. While pharmacy costs were significantly greater when urokinase was used, reduction in length of stay accounted for similar total hospital costs compared with rt-PA. These findings must be considered in the context of the retrospective nature of the analysis and the potential to use dosing regimens that differ from those in this study.