medigraphic.com
ISSN 0187-5337 (Print)
Instituto Nacional de Perinatología

2008, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Perinatol Reprod Hum 2008; 22 (3)

Tratamiento de la infertilidad asociada a hiperprolactinemia. Análisis de costo-efectividad en una población asegurada del ISSSTE

Guillén GMÁ, Canseco LFD, Vega HG, Rivas BRE, Zapata SL, Dávila LG, Mould QJ

Language: Spanish
References: 18
Page: 174-183
PDF size: 439.05 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: In women, hyperprolactinemia is a cause of infertility.
Objetive: To estimate the cost effectiveness of the use of cabergoline, bromocriptine and the alternate therapy in the treatment of women with hy perprolactinemia who desired a pregnancy.
Materials and Methods: The treatment algorithm and the resource use was obtained from medical records from the ISSSTE general hospital, 20 de Noviembre. The effectiveness measure was the percentage of patients who gets pregnant after the treatment considering 31 months as a temporal horizon. A simulation of 1,000 patients was used to obtain the cost-effectiveness and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.
Results: Cost effectiveness ratios for each alternative in Mexican pesos (MXP) were MXP $109,802, MXP $136,239 and MXP $164,902 for the alternate strategy, cabergoline and bromocriptine (the usual practice) respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio using bromocriptine as base strategy, were MXP $25,663 and MXP $80,685 for alternate therapy and cabergoline respectively.
Conclusion: Alternate therapy is the most cost effective strategy for the treatment of women with hyperprolactinemia who want to get pregnant in comparison with the other two strategies considered.


REFERENCES

  1. Barlier A, Jaquet P. Quinagolide- a valuable treatment option for hyperprolactinaemia. Eur J Endocrin 2006; 154: 187-95.

  2. Drange MR, Fram NR, Herman-Bonert V, et al. (faltan autores) Pituitary Tumor Registry: a novel clinical resource. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2000; 85: 168-74.

  3. Arafah BM, Nasrallah MP. Pituitary tumors: pathophysiology, clinical manifestations and management. Endocrine-Related Cancer 2001; 8: 287-305.

  4. Crosignani PG. Current treatment issues in female hyperprolactinaemia. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2006; 125: 152-64.

  5. Mah PM, Webster J. Hyperprolactinemia: etiology, diagnosis, and management. Semin Reprod Med 2002; 20(4): 365-74.

  6. Midland Therapeutic Review & Advisory Comité. Summary sheet for cabergoline (dostinex®) for the treatment of hyperprolactinaemia. March 2001. SS01/08.

  7. Schlechte Janet, Goldner Whitney. What’s the best approach to hyperprolactinemia. Contemporary Ob/Gyn 2004; 49: 49-54.

  8. Bachelot A, Courtillot C, Touraine P. When and how should hyperprolactinemia be treated? Presse Med 2005; 34(10): 731-7.

  9. Molitch ME. Pituitary diseases in pregnancy. Semin Perinatol 1998; 22(6): 457-70.

  10. Colao AM, Di Sarno A, Sarnacchiaro F, et al.(faltan autores). Prolactinomas resistant to standard dopamine agonists respond to chronic cabergoline treatment. J Clin Endocrinol Metabol 1997; 82: 876-83.

  11. Di Sarno A, Landi ML, Marzullo P, et al. (faltan autores) The effect of quinagolide and cabergoline, two selective dopamine receptor type 2 agonists, in the treatment of prolactinomas. Clinic Endocrinol 2000; 53(1): 53-60.

  12. Di Sarno A, Landi ML, Cappabianca P, et al. (faltan autores) Resistance to cabergoline as compared with bromocriptine in hyperprolactinemia: prevalence, clinical definition, and therapeutic strategy. J Clinic Endocrinol Metabol 2001; 86(11): 5256-61.

  13. De Luis DA, et al. (faltan autores) A randomized cross-over study comparing cabergoline and quinagolide in the treatment of hyperprolactinemic patients. Journal of Endocrinological Investigation 2000; 23(7): 428-34.

  14. Sabuncu T, Arikan E, Tasan E, et al. (faltan autores) Comparison of the effects of cabergoline and bromocriptine on prolactin levels in hyperprolactinemic patients. Internal Medicine 2001; 40: 857-61.

  15. Banco de México. Disponible en: http://www.banxico.org.mx (fecha última consulta 02 Enero 2007).

  16. Weinstein MC, Siegel JE, Gold MR, et al. (faltan autores) Recommendations of the panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA 1996; 276: 1253-8.

  17. Cuadro Básico y Catálogo de Medicamentos. Comisión Interinstitucional del Cuadro Básico de insumos del Sector Salud. Edición 2005. Disponible en: www.csg.gob.mx.

  18. Philips Z, Barraza-Llorens M, Posnett J. Evaluation of the relative cost-effectiveness of treatments for infertility in the UK. Hum Reprod. 2000 15(1): 95-106.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com