Advertisement

American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs

, Volume 7, Issue 3, pp 199–217 | Cite as

Economic Evaluation of Enoxaparin for Anticoagulation in Early Cardioversion of Persisting Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation

A Statutory Health Insurance Perspective from Germany
  • Peter K. Schädlich
  • Caroline Schmidt-Lucke
  • Eduard Huppertz
  • Walter Lehmacher
  • Uwe Nixdorff
  • Christoph Stellbrink
  • Josef Georg Brecht
Original Research Article

Abstract

Objective

To estimate, from the perspective of Statutory Health Insurance (SHI, third-party payer) in Germany, the economic consequences of using the subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) enoxaparin instead of intravenous unfractionated heparin followed by oral phenprocoumon (UFH/PPC) for anticoagulation in patients undergoing transesophageal echocardiography (TEE)-guided early electrical cardioversion (ECV) of persisting nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) without intracardiac clot.

Design and setting

The incremental cost for the enoxaparin-based regimen versus the UFH/PPC-based regimen was chosen as the target variable. A decision-analytic model considering the in- and outpatient sectors was used to quantify the target variable. Resource use during in- and outpatient treatment was taken from the Anticoagulation in Cardioversion using Enoxaparin (ACE) trial and from expert interviews with cardiologists in Germany in order to reflect the day-to-day conditions of clinical practice. Costs were given by SHI expenses for inpatient treatment and for medical services, drugs, disposables, and laboratory tests during outpatient treatment. These costs were determined by multiplying utilized resource items by the price or tariff of each item based on German healthcare regulations for the reference period of 2003/2004. According to the ACE trial, the evaluation encompassed 28 (26–30) treatment days with two consecutive phases. Phase I with 5 (3–12) days comprised diagnostics, start of anticoagulation, and ECV. Phase II with the remaining days consisted of continued anticoagulation and patient monitoring. The dosage of enoxaparin was 1 mg/kg bodyweight twice daily in treatment phase I followed by 40mg twice daily with a bodyweight <65kg or 60mg twice daily with a BW ≥65kg in treatment phase II. The daily dosages of UFH by continuous infusion and overlapping PPC were adjusted to an International Normalized Ratio of 2.0–3.0 in treatment phase I followed by 2.25mg PPC once daily in treatment phase II. Patients with any comorbidity and complication level (CCL) and those with low comorbidity and complications expected to occur in rare cases only (low-risk patients) were analyzed separately. In each base-case analysis, exclusively point estimates of all respective model parameters were applied. Main outcome measures and results: There were savings of €339 and €579 per patient receiving the enoxaparin-based regimen versus the UFH/PPC-based regimen in the case of patients with any CCL and of low-risk patients, respectively (€1 ≈ $US1.25; first quarter 2004 values). In comprehensive sensitivity analyzes, the robustness of the model and its results was shown. First, the impact of the model parameters on the target variable for each patient group was quantified in a deterministic model. Secondly, the dependency of the target variable on random variables was described for each patient group using Monte Carlo simulation. Irrespective of the patient group, the cost weight and the base rate of hospitals for inpatient ECV in phase I turned out to have the greatest impact on the savings obtained by the enoxaparin-based regimen. In the case of patients with any CCL, this impact was about 1.4-fold of that of the probability of enoxaparin patients undergoing outpatient ECV in phase I. In the case of low-risk patients, the impact of the cost weight and the base rate of hospitals for inpatient ECV in phase I was about 4.1-fold of that of the price of enoxaparin 60mg prefilled syringes in the outpatient sector. In 79% and 93% of 10 000 simulated comparisons each versus the UFH/PPC-based regimen, there were savings obtained by the enoxaparin-based regimen in patients with any CCL and in low-risk patients, respectively.

Conclusions

Results of this evaluation showed that an enoxaparin-based regimen for TEE-guided ECV of AF in patients without intracardiac clot offers SHI in Germany a considerable saving potential when used instead of an UFH/PPC-based regimen.

Keywords

Atrial Fibrillation Enoxaparin Target Variable Atrial Fibrillation Patient Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Sanofi-Aventis, Berlin, Germany for funding this study and the cardiologists Heyder Omran, MD, Bonn, Germany and Stefan G. Spitzer, MD, Dresden, Germany for providing information on resource use during early electrical cardioversion of atrial fibrillation in the inand outpatient sectors in Germany. Josef Georg Brecht, PhD, and Peter K. Schàdlich, PhD, are the principals of InForMed GmbH, the contractor of this study. Walter Lehmacher, PhD, Uwe Nixdorff, MD, Caroline Schmidt-Lucke, MD, and Christoph Stellbrink, MD, are members of the Anticoagulation in Cardioversion using Enoxaparin Study Group. Eduard Huppertz, MD, was a salaried employee of Sanofi-Aventis at the time this economic evaluation was conducted and the article was written. The views expressed in this paper, however, are solely those of the authors, who have no conflicts of interest directly relevant to the content of this study.

The main author is Peter K. Schàdlich. Uwe Nixdorff, Caroline Schmidt- Lucke, and Christoph Stellbrink have revised the text and checked for the accuracy of the medical aspects. Josef Georg Brecht, Eduard Huppertz, and Walter Lehmacher have revised the text and checked for the accuracy of the health economic and statistical aspects. All authors have revised the manuscript and approved it.

The information contained in this manuscript has been presented in part at the 7th Annual European Congress of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, Hamburg, Germany, October 2004;[72] at the 71st Annual Meeting of the German Cardiac Society, Mannheim, Germany, March 2005;[73] at the European Society of Cardiology Congress 2005, Stockholm, Sweden, September 2005;[74] and is published in part in the German language.[57]

References

  1. 1.
    Feinberg WM, Blackshear JL, Laupacis A, et al. Prevalence, age distribution, and gender of patients with atrial fibrillation: analysis and implications. Arch Intern Med 1995; 155: 468–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Greenlee RT, Vidaillet H. Recent progress in the epidemiology of atrial fibrillation. Curr Opin Cardiol 2005; 20: 7–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fuster V, Rydén LE, Asinger RW, et al. ACC/AHA/ESC guidelines for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the European Society of Cardiology Committee for Practice Guidelines and Policy Conferences (Committee to Develop Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation). Eur Heart J 2001; 22: 1852–923.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gallagher MG, Camm AJ. Classification of atrial fibrillation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1997; 20: 1603–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Singer DE, Albers GW, Dalen JE, et al. Antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation. The seventh ACCP conference on antithrombotic and thrombolytic therapy. Chest 2004; 126: 429S–56S.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stewart S, Murphy N, Walker A, et al. Cost of an emerging epidemic: an economic analysis of atrial fibrillation in the UK. Heart 2004; 90: 286–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stellbrink C, Hanrath P, Nixdorff U, et al., on behalf of the ACE Study Group. Low-molecular weight heparin for prevention of thromboembolic complications in cardioversion: rationale and design of the ACE study (Anticoagulation in Cardioversion using Enoxaparin). Z Kardiol 2002; 91: 249–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stellbrink C, Nixdorff U, Hofmann T, et al., on behalf of the ACE (Anticoagulation in Cardioversion using Enoxaparin) Study Group. Safety and efficacy of enoxaparin compared with unfractionated heparin and oral anticoagulants for prevention of thromboembolic complications in cardioversion of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: the Anticoagulation in Cardioversion using Enoxaparin (ACE) trial. Circulation 2004; 109: 997–1003.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Weitz JI. Low-molecular-weight heparins. N Engl J Med 1997; 337: 688–98.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wells PS, Kovacs MJ, Bormanis J, et al. Expanding eligibility for outpatient treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism with low-molecular-weight heparin: a comparison of patient self-injection with homecare injection. Arch Intern Med 1998; 158: 1809–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grönefeld G, Ehrlich JR, Hohnloser SH. Comparison of outpatient vs inpatient direct current cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: safety, efficacy and cost savings. Eur Heart J Suppl 2003; 5 Suppl. H: H19–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zimetbaum P, Reynolds MR, Ho KKL, et al. Impact of a practice guideline for patients with atrial fibrillation on medical resource utilization and costs. Am J Cardiol 2003; 92: 677–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Deutsche Gesellschaft für Angiologie, Gesellschaft für Gefäβmedizin. Leitlinien zur Diagnostik und Therapie der Venenthrombose und Lungenembolie: Stand Januar 2002. VASA 2002; 31 Suppl. 60: 1–19.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    LAUER-FISCHER GmbH, editor. Groβe Deutsche Spezialitäten-Taxe, Lauer®-Taxe mit Apotheken-Ein- und Verkaufspreisen. Fürth: LAUER-FISCHER GmbH, 01. März 2004.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Murray RD, Deitcher SR, Shah A, et al. Potential clinical efficacy and cost benefit of a transesophageal echocardiography-guided low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin) approach to antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing immediate cardioversion from atrial fibrillation. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2001; 14: 200–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Aventis Pharma Deutschland GmbH. Integrated Study Report of Study PAG 98008 (ACE). Bad Soden/Taunus: Aventis Pharma Deutschland GmbH, 2003 Nov. (Data on file).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Brecht JG, Jenke A, Köhler ME, et al. für den Arbeitskreis Pharmakoökonomie der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Klinische Pharmakologie und Therapie e.V. Empfehlungen der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Klinische Phamakologie und Therapie zur Durchführung und Bewertung pharmakoökonomischer Studien. Med Klin 1995; 90: 541–6.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Drummond MF, O’Brien B, Stoddart GL, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of healthcare programme. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bundesministerium für Gesundheit und Soziale Sicherung — BMGS, editor. Gesetzliche Krankenversicherung: Mitgliederstatistik KM6. Stichtag 1. Juli 2003. Bonn: BMGS, 2003.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Statistisches Bundesamt, editor. Statistisches Jahrbuch 2004 für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt, 2004.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gesetz zur Einführung des diagnose-orientierten Fallpauschalensystems für Krankenhäuser (Fallpauschalengesetz: FPG). April 2002. BGB1 I 2002; (23): 1412–37.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Verordnung zum Fallpauschalensystem für Krankenhäuser für das Jahr 2004 (KFPV 2004). Oktober 2003. BGB1 I 2003; 13: 1995–2069.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gesetz zur Modernisierung der Gesetzlichen Krankenversicherung (GMG): November 2003. BGB1 I 2003; 14: 2190–258.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung — KBV, editor. Einheitlicher Bewertungsmaβstab (EBM). Dienstauflage der KBV. Köln: KBV, 01. Juli 2003.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Institut für das Entgeltsystem im Krankenhaus gGmbH — InEK, editor. Abschlussbericht. Weiterentwicklung des G-DRG-Systems für das Jahr 2004. Klassifikation, Katalog und Bewertungsrelationen. Band II: Fallpauschalen-Katalog — Klinische Profile — Kostenprofile. Siegburg: InEK, 19. Dezember 2003.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mohr C. Das zweite Jahr im DRG-Zeitalter steht bevor. Noch erfüllen die Fallpauschalen die Erwartungen der Krankenkassen nicht. Die Betriebskrankenkasse 2003; 91: 614–20.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Bayerns. Auszahlungspunktwerte des Quartals 3/ 2003 in Bayern [online]. Available from URL: https://www.kvb.de [Accessed 2004 Feb 07].Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Berlin. Auszahlungspunktwerte Quartal 2/2003 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.kvberlin.de [Accessed 2004 Feb 6].Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Brandenburg. Punktwerte der KV Brandenburg: I/03 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.kvbb.de [Accessed 2004 Feb 7].Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Bremen. Punktwerte des Quartals III/2003 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.kvhb.de [Accessed 2004 Feb 7].Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Hamburg. Zielpunktwert [online]. Available from URL: http://www.kvhh.de [Accessed 2004 Feb 7].Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Hessen. Info.doc. Rundschreiben der KV Hessen. Punktwerte 1. und 2. Quartal 2003. Frankfurt am Main: KV Hessen, Dezember 2003 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.kv-hessen.de [Accessed 2004 Feb 7].Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Koblenz. Punktwerte im fachärztlichen Versorgungsbereich. Koblenz: KV Koblenz, 01.07.2003 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.kvkoblenz.de [Accessed 2004 Feb 7].Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Niedersachsen. HVM-Punktwerte 2/2003 [online]. Available from URL: http://kvns.arzt.de [Accessed 2004 Feb 7].Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Nordbaden. Auszahlungspunktwerte 3/2003 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.kvnb.de [Accessed 2004 Feb 7].Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Nordrhein. Punktwerte 3/2003 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.kvno.de [Accessed 2004 Feb 7].Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Nord-Württemberg. Punktwerte der KV NW 3/2003 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.kvnw.de [Accessed 2004 Feb 7].Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Rheinhessen. Punktwerte Quartal 3/2003 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.kvnw.de [Accessed 2004 Feb 7].Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Sachsen. Auszahlungspunktwerte für das Quartal II/ 2003 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.kvs-sachsen.de [Accessed 2004 Feb 7].Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Sachsen-Anhalt. Auszahlungspunktwerte III. Quartal 2003 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.kvsa.de [Accessed 2004 Feb 7].Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Schleswig-Holstein. Auszahlungspunktwerte 3/2003 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.kvsh.de [Accessed 2004 Feb 5].Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Südbaden. Punktwerte 2. Quartal 2003 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.kvsb.de [Accessed 2004 Feb 7].Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Südwürttemberg. Punktwerte 3/2003 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.kvsw.de [Accessed 2004 Feb 7].Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Thüringen. Auszahlungspunktwerte für das I. Quartal 2003 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.kv-thueringen.de [Accessed 2003 Dec 10].Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Bronstein IN, Semendjajew KA, Grosche G, et al. Teubner-Taschenbuch der Mathematik. Stuttgart: Teubner, 1996.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Schädlich PK, Brecht JG. The cost effectiveness of acamprosate in the treatment of alcoholism in Germany: economic evaluation of the Prevention of Relapse with Acamprosate in the Management of Alcoholism (PRAMA) study. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 13 (6): 719–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Schädlich PK, Huppertz E, Brecht JG. Cost-effectiveness analysis of ramipril in heart failure after myocardial infarction: economic evaluation of the Acute Infarction Ramipril Efficacy (AIRE) study for Germany from the perspective of Statutory Health Insurance. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 14 (6): 654–69.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Schädlich PK, Brecht JG. Economic evaluation of specific immunotherapy versus symptomatic treatment of allergic rhinitis in Germany. Pharmacoeconomics 2000; 17 (1): 37–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Kleijnen JPC, van Groenendal W. Simulation: a statistical perspective. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, 1992.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Fishman G. Monte Carlo: concepts, algorithms, and applications. New York: Springer, 1996.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Hartung J, Elpelt B, Klösener KH. Statistik: Lehr-und Handbuch der angewandten Statistik. 13. Auflage. München: Oldenbourg, 2002.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Verband Deutscher Rentenversicherungsträger — VDR, editor. VDR STATISTIK Band 149. Rentenzugang des Jahres 2003. Tabellen 102.10 Z, 102.20 Z. Frankfurt: VDR, 2004.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Verband Deutscher Rentenversicherungsträger — VDR, editor. VDR STATISTIK Band 153. Rentenzugang des Jahres 2004. Tabellen 102.10 Z, 102.20 Z. Frankfurt: VDR, 2005.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Antonanzas F. Transferability of economic evaluation results. Pharmacoeconomics 2004; 22: 827.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Weite R, Feenstra T, Jager H, et al. A decision chart for assessing and improving the transferability of economic evaluation results between countries. Pharmacoeconomics 2004; 22: 857–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Boulenger S, Nixon J, Drummond M, et al. Can economic evaluations be made more transferable? Eur J Health Econom 2005; 6: 334–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Schädlich PK, Schmidt-Lucke C, Huppertz E, et al. Gesundheitsökonomischer Vergleich zweier Antikoagulations-Regime bei frühzeitiger Kardioversion des persistierenden, nicht-valvulären Vorhofflimmerns: Erkenntnisse aus der ACE-Studie. Perfusion 2006; 19: 373–9.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Warkentin TE, Levine MN, Hirsh J, et al. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in patients treated with low-molecular-weight heparin or unfractionated heparin. N Engl J Med 1995; 332: 1330–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Ufer M. Comparative pharmacokinetics of vitamin K antagonists: warfarin, phenprocoumon and acenocoumarol. Clin Pharmacokinet 2005; 44: 1227–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Schmidt-Lucke C, Paar WD, Stellbrink C, et al., on behalf of the ACE (Anticoagulation in Cardioversion using Enoxaparin) Study Group. Quality of anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin plus phenprocoumon for the prevention of thromboembolic complications in cardioversion for non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Sub-analysis from the Anticoagulation in Cardioversion using Enoxaparin (ACE) trial. Thromb Res 2007; 119: 27–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Samama MM, Gerotziafas GT. Comparative pharmacokinetics of LMWHs. Semin Thromb Hemost 2000; 26 Suppl. 1: 31–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Roijer A, Eskilsson J, Olsson B. Transoesophageal echocardiography-guided cardioversion of atrial fibrillation or flutter: selection of a low-risk group for immediate cardioversion. Eur Heart J 2000; 21: 837–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Turpie AG. Antithrombotics and anticoagulants in coronary syndromes and stroke. Semin Thromb Hemost 2000; 26: 79–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Ansell J, Hirsh J, Poller L, et al. The pharmacology and management of the vitamin K antagonists. The seventh ACCP conference on antithrombotic and thrombolytic therapy. Chest 2004; 126: 204S–33S.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Gadisseur AP, van der Meer FJ, Adriaansen HJ, et al. Therapeutic quality control of oral anticoagulant therapy comparing the short-acting acenocoumarol and the long-acting phenprocoumon. Br J Haematol 2002; 117: 940–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Steffensen FH, Kristensen K, Ejlersen E, et al. Major haemorrhagic complications during oral anticoagulant therapy in a Danish population-based cohort. J Intern Med 1997; 242: 497–503.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Wyse DG, Waldo AL, DiMarco JP, et al. A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2002; 347: 1825–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Coplen SE, Antman EM, Berlin JA, et al. Efficacy and safety of quinidine therapy for maintenance of sinus rhythm after cardioversion: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Circulation 1990; 82: 1106–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Heeringa J, van der Kuip DAM, Hofman A, et al. Prevalence, incidence and lifetime risk of atrial fibrillation: the Rotterdam study. Eur Heart J 2006; 27: 949–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Lévy S, Maarek M, Coumel P, et al. Characterization of different subsets of atrial fibrillation in general practice in France: the ALFA study. Circulation 1999; 99: 3028–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Nixdorff U. Antithrombotic strategies for the management of non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Int J Cardiol 2005; 100: 191–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Schädlich PK, Lehmacher W, Huppertz E, et al. Economic evaluation of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) guided cardioversion in the Anticoagulation in Cardioversion using Enoxaparin (ACE) trial from the perspective of Statutory Health Insurance (SHI) in Germany [abstract PCV37]. Value Health 2004; 7: 696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Schädlich PK, Schmidt-Lucke C, Huppertz E, et al. Gesundheitsökonomischer Vergleich zweier Antikoagulations-Regimes bei der Kardioversion des persistierenden, nicht-valvulären Vorhofflimmerns — Erkenntnisse aus der ACE-Studie [abstract V239]. Z Kardiol 2005; 94: Suppl. 1 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.abstractserver.de/dgk2005/ft/abstracts/V239.HTM [Accessed 2005 March 13].Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Schädlich PK, Schmidt-Lucke C, Huppertz E, et al. Cost saving anticoagulation with enoxaparin in patients undergoing cardioversion of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: results from the Anticoagulation in Cardioversion using Enoxaparin (ACE) Study [abstract P2301]. Eur Heart J 2005; 26: 368.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter K. Schädlich
    • 1
  • Caroline Schmidt-Lucke
    • 2
  • Eduard Huppertz
    • 3
  • Walter Lehmacher
    • 4
  • Uwe Nixdorff
    • 5
  • Christoph Stellbrink
    • 6
  • Josef Georg Brecht
    • 1
  1. 1.InForMed GmbH — Outcomes Research and Health Economics, Bureau ItzehoeItzehoeGermany
  2. 2.Molecular CardiologyUniversity HospitalFrankfurt/MainGermany
  3. 3.Health Outcomes ConsultancyNiedererbach/WwGermany
  4. 4.Institute for Medical Statistics, Informatics and EpidemiologyUniversity of CologneCologneGermany
  5. 5.European Prevention CenterMedconsult GmbHKrefeldGermany
  6. 6.Medical Clinic IIStädtische Kliniken Bielefeld gGmbHBielefeldGermany

Personalised recommendations