An Economic Evaluation of rt-PA Locking Solution in Dialysis Catheters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a recent randomized trial, weekly recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA), 1 mg per lumen, once per week, and twice-weekly heparin as a locking solution (rt-PA/heparin) resulted in lower risks of hemodialysis catheter malfunction and catheter-related bacteremia compared with thrice-weekly heparin (heparin alone). We collected detailed costs within this trial to determine how choice of locking solution would affect overall health care costs, including the cost of locking solutions and all other relevant medical costs over the course of the 6-month trial. Nonparametric bootstrap estimates were used to derive 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and mean cost differences between the treatment groups. The cost of the locking solution was higher in patients receiving rt-PA/heparin, but this was partially offset by lower costs for managing complications. Overall, the difference in unadjusted mean cost for managing patients with rt-PA/heparin versus heparin alone was Can$323 (95% CI, -$935 to $1581; P=0.62). When the costs were extrapolated over a 1-year time horizon using decision analysis, assuming ongoing rt-PA effectiveness, the overall costs of the strategies were similar. This finding was sensitive to plausible variation in the frequency and cost of managing patients with catheter-related bacteremia, and whether the benefit of rt-PA on catheter-related bacteremia was maintained in the long term. In summary, we noted no significant difference in the mean overall cost of an rt-PA/heparin strategy as a locking solution for catheters compared with thrice-weekly heparin. Cost savings due to a lower risk of hospitalization for catheter-related bacteremia partially offset the increased cost of rt-PA.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".