Average healthcare costs per capita among survivors, expectedly, rose over age from $2062 (95% confidence interval [CI] $1553-$2478) during the first year of life to $14 307 (95% CI $13 706-$14 956) at 85 years or older. Average costs of death were $44 569 (95% CI $14 304-$67 369) during the first year of life and declined by -$321 (95% CI -$620 to -$22) per 1 year older. The US catalog of healthcare costs among survivors and decedents can facilitate calculations of future costs in CEA as recommended by the Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine.The US catalog of healthcare costs among survivors and decedents can facilitate calculations of future costs in CEA as recommended by the Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. To estimate the cost-effectiveness of introducing a publicly funded pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) program in Ireland. We constructed a state-transition Markov model. This was a cross-sectional population model that tracked all HIV-negative men who have sex with men (MSM) in Ireland over their lifetime. Access to a publicly funded PrEP program (medications+ frequent monitoring) in high-risk MSM was compared with no PrEP. The primary outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). In the base case, introducing a PrEP program was considered cost saving and provided significant health benefits to the population. Univariate sensitivity analysis demonstrated that PrEP efficacy and HIV incidence had the greatest impact on cost-effectiveness. Including an increase in sexually transmitted infections had a negligible impact on the results. Efficacy was a significant driver in the model. PrEP was cost saving at all efficacy values above 60%, and at the lowest reported efficacy in MSM (44% in the iPrEX trial), the ICER was €4711/QALY (highly cost-effective). Event-based dosing (administration during high-risk periods only) was associated with additional cost savings. Zilurgisertib fumarate price We estimated that 1705 individuals (95% CI 617-3452) would join the program in year 1. The incremental budget impact was €1.5m (95% CI €0.5m to €3m) in the first year and €5.4m over 5 years (95% CI €1.8m to €11.5m), with 173 cases of HIV averted over 5 years. We found that the introduction of a PrEP program would be considered cost saving in the first cost-effectiveness analysis of its kind in Ireland.We found that the introduction of a PrEP program would be considered cost saving in the first cost-effectiveness analysis of its kind in Ireland. It is not known whether using propofol total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) to reduce incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is cost-effective. We assessed the economic impact of propofol TIVA versus inhalational anesthesia in adult patients for ambulatory and inpatient procedures relevant to the US healthcare system. Two models simulate individual patient pathways through inpatient and ambulatory surgery with propofol TIVA or inhalational anesthesia with economic inputs from studies on adult surgical US patients. Efficacy inputs were obtained from a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses assessed the robustness of the model estimates. Lower PONV rate, shorter stay in the post-anesthesia care unit, and reduced need for rescue antiemetics offset the higher costs for anesthetics, analgesics, and muscle relaxants with propofol TIVA and reduced cost by 11.41 ± 10.73 USD per patient in the inpatient model and 11.25 ± 9.81 USD in the ambulatory patient model. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated strong robustness of the results. Maintenance of general anesthesia with propofol was cost-saving compared to inhalational anesthesia in both inpatient and ambulatory surgical settings in the United States. These economic results support current guideline recommendations, which endorse propofol TIVA to reduce PONV risk and enhance postoperative recovery.Maintenance of general anesthesia with propofol was cost-saving compared to inhalational anesthesia in both inpatient and ambulatory surgical settings in the United States. These economic results support current guideline recommendations, which endorse propofol TIVA to reduce PONV risk and enhance postoperative recovery. To model the cost-effectiveness of the TYRX Absorbable Antibacterial Envelope when used in patients at increased risk of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection in the context of 3 European healthcare systems Germany, Italy, and England. A decision tree model with a lifetime horizon was populated using data from the Worldwide Randomized Antibiotic Envelope Infection Prevention Trial, a large multicenter randomized controlled trial. Use of the antibacterial envelope adjunctive to standard of care was compared to standard of care infection prevention alone. Patients in the model were divided into subgroups based on presence of factors known to increase infection risk. The antibacterial envelope had the most favorable cost-effectiveness profile when patients had previously experienced CIED infection, had a history of immunosuppressive therapy, or had a Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial (PADIT) score indicating high risk of infection (scores ≥6) at cost-effectiveness thresholds of €50 000 in Germany (assumed in the absence of an official threshold), €40 000 in Italy, and £30 000 in England. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that the antibacterial envelope was likely to be cost-effective in patients with other risk factors (including replacement of high power CIEDs, generator replacement with lead modification, and PADIT scores indicating intermediate risk of infection) when used with some device types and in some countries. The absorbable antibacterial envelope was associated with cost-effectiveness ratios below European benchmarks in selected patients at increased risk of infection, suggesting the envelope provides value for European healthcare systems by reducing CIED infections.The absorbable antibacterial envelope was associated with cost-effectiveness ratios below European benchmarks in selected patients at increased risk of infection, suggesting the envelope provides value for European healthcare systems by reducing CIED infections.