Literature DB >> 11178753

Cost-effective management of common bile duct stones: a decision analysis of the use of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), intraoperative cholangiography, and laparoscopic bile duct exploration.

D R Urbach1, Y S Khajanchee, B A Jobe, B A Standage, P D Hansen, L L Swanstrom.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There are a variety of approaches to the diagnosis and treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).
METHODS: Decision modeling was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of four strategies for managing CBD stones around the time of LC: (a) routine preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (preoperative ERCP), (b) LC with intraoperative cholangiography (IOC), followed by laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCDE), (c) LC with IOC, followed by ERCP (postoperative ERCP), and (d) expectant management (LC without any tests for CBD stones). Local hospital data were used to estimate costs. Cost-effectiveness was expressed in terms of the cost per case of residual CBD stones prevented (in excess of the cost of LC alone). Diagnostic test characteristics, procedure success rates, and adverse event probabilities were derived from a systematic review of the literature. Sensitivity analysis was used to explore the effect of uncertainty on the results of the model.
RESULTS: LC alone was the least costly strategy, but it was also the least effective. Of the more aggressive strategies, LCDE and preoperative ERCP were associated with marginal costs of $5993.60 and $299,259.35, respectively, per case of residual CBD stones prevented. Postoperative ERCP was more costly and less effective than LCDE, but it had a lower cost-effectiveness ratio than preoperative ERCP when the prevalence of CBD stones was <80%.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to other common approaches, laparoscopic CBD exploration is a cost-effective method of managing CBD stones in patients who undergo LC. If expertise in LCDE is unavailable, selective postoperative ERCP is preferred over routine preoperative ERCP, unless the probability of CBD stones is very high (>80%).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11178753     DOI: 10.1007/s004640000322

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  37 in total

1.  Bile duct stones and laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a decision analysis to assess the roles of intraoperative cholangiography, EUS, and ERCP.

Authors:  A V Sahai; P D Mauldin; V Marsi; R H Hawes; B J Hoffman
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 9.427

2.  Randomised trial of laparoscopic exploration of common bile duct versus postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for common bile duct stones.

Authors:  M Rhodes; L Sussman; L Cohen; M P Lewis
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1998-01-17       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Prospective randomized comparison of laparoscopic ultrasonography using a flexible-tip ultrasound probe and intraoperative dynamic cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  M Birth; K U Ehlers; K Delinikolas; H F Weiser
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Laparoscopic ultrasonography as compared with static or dynamic cholangiography at laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A prospective multicenter trial.

Authors:  G V Stiegmann; N J Soper; C J Filipi; R C McIntyre; M P Callery; J F Cordova
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 5.  Diagnosis and treatment of common bile duct stones (CBDS). Results of a consensus development conference.

Authors: 
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 6.  A clinician's guide to cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  A S Detsky; I G Naglie
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1990-07-15       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Endoscopic ultrasonography immediately prior to laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective evaluation.

Authors:  J M Aubertin; D Levoir; J L Bouillot; H Becheur; F Bloch; K Aouad; J H Alexandre; J P Petite
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 10.093

8.  Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Authors:  C F Frey; E J Burbige; W B Meinke; T G Pullos; H N Wong; D M Hickman; J Belber
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1982-07       Impact factor: 2.565

9.  Magnetic resonance cholangiography: comparison with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Authors:  J A Soto; M A Barish; E K Yucel; D Siegenberg; J T Ferrucci; R Chuttani
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 22.682

10.  Laparoscopic cholangiography. Results and indications.

Authors:  J L Flowers; K A Zucker; S M Graham; W A Scovill; A L Imbembo; R W Bailey
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 12.969

View more
  45 in total

1.  Intraoperative cholangiography is still indicated after preoperative endoscopic cholangiography for gallstone disease.

Authors:  M Edye; A Dalvi; J Canin-Endres; E Baskin-Bey; B Salky
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2002-02-08       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Laparoscopic management of CBD stones: an Indian experience.

Authors:  Jagdish Chander; Anubhav Vindal; Pawanindra Lal; Nikhil Gupta; Vinod Kumar Ramteke
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-06-10       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) to remove common bile duct stones during routine laparoscopic cholecystectomy does not prolong hospitalization: a 2-year experience.

Authors:  L Enochsson; B Lindberg; F Swahn; U Arnelo
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-02-02       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  [Therapeutic splitting as standard treatment for cholelithiasis].

Authors:  U T Hopt; U Adam
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 0.955

5.  Management of common bile duct stones in a rural area of the United States: results of a survey.

Authors:  J Bingener; W H Schwesinger
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-01-25       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Do all patients with abnormal intraoperative cholangiogram merit endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography?

Authors:  S Varadarajulu; M A Eloubeidi; C M Wilcox; R H Hawes; P B Cotton
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-03-16       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 7.  Laparoscopic transcystic duct common bile duct exploration.

Authors:  S Lyass; E H Phillips
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-03-16       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in patients with previous upper abdominal operations.

Authors:  Keong Won Yun; Young Joon Ahn; Hae Won Lee; In Mok Jung; Jung Kee Chung; Seung Chul Heo; Ki-Tae Hwang; Hye Seong Ahn
Journal:  Korean J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg       Date:  2012-11-30

Review 9.  Long-term results from laparoscopic common bile duct exploration.

Authors:  A Waage; C Strömberg; C-E Leijonmarck; D Arvidsson
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-05-13       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Clinical spotlight review for the management of choledocholithiasis.

Authors:  Vimal K Narula; Eleanor C Fung; D Wayne Overby; William Richardson; Dimitrios Stefanidis
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-02-24       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.